• Johnathan A Bernard, Jonathan R Dattilo, Uma Srikumaran, Bashir A Zikria, Amit Jain, and Dawn M LaPorte.
• Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
• J Surg Educ. 2016 Nov 1; 73 (6): 1020-1025.

ObjectiveTraditional measures for evaluating resident surgical technical skills (e.g., case logs) assess operative volume but not level of surgical proficiency. Our goal was to compare the reliability and validity of 3 tools for measuring surgical skill among orthopedic residents when performing 3 open surgical approaches to the shoulder.MethodsA total of 23 residents at different stages of their surgical training were tested for technical skill pertaining to 3 shoulder surgical approaches using the following measures: Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) checklists, the Global Rating Scale (GRS), and a final pass/fail assessment determined by 3 upper extremity surgeons. Adverse events were recorded. The Cronbach α coefficient was used to assess reliability of the OSATS checklists and GRS scores. Interrater reliability was calculated with intraclass correlation coefficients. Correlations among OSATS checklist scores, GRS scores, and pass/fail assessment were calculated with Spearman ρ. Validity of OSATS checklists was determined using analysis of variance with postgraduate year (PGY) as a between-subjects factor. Significance was set at p < 0.05 for all tests.ResultsCriterion validity was shown between the OSATS checklists and GRS for the 3 open shoulder approaches. Checklist scores showed superior interrater reliability compared with GRS and subjective pass/fail measurements. GRS scores were positively correlated across training years. The incidence of adverse events was significantly higher among PGY-1 and PGY-2 residents compared with more experienced residents.ConclusionOSATS checklists are a valid and reliable assessment of technical skills across 3 surgical shoulder approaches. However, checklist scores do not measure quality of technique. Documenting adverse events is necessary to assess quality of technique and ultimate pass/fail status. Multiple methods of assessing surgical skill should be considered when evaluating orthopedic resident surgical performance.Copyright © 2016 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

27 keywords...

hide…