Surgeons as Educators pp 229-234 | Cite as
Modern Theory for Development of Simulators for Surgical Education
Abstract
As the demand for simulation-based educational curricula continues to grow, the development of models to meet the educational needs for surgeons is also evolving. In this chapter, we present a process for the design and development of simulators used in medical/surgical education. The process for development was conceived based on the concept of “backward design” as part of the Understanding by Design® Framework (UbD™) which was introduced by Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe and the current Guidelines for Simulation Development which was developed by the Technology and Simulation Committee of the Accredited Education Institutes Consortium. We also applied the taxonomy for test development and validation described in the current “Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing” which was produced through collaborative efforts of a committee from the Educational Research Association, the National Council on Measurement in Education, and the American Psychological Association. Four phases are described for this process. Phase I includes assessment of the requirements from the physicians’ perspective, phase II entails translating physicians’ requirements to engineers’ requirements, phase III includes development of the prototype(s), and phase IV describes an iterative validation process. All four phases are presented and discussed in detail.
Keywords
Simulation Development Process Cognitive task analysis Physicians Engineers Phase Validation Surgical educationReferences
- 1.Noureldin YA, Stoica A, Kassouf W, Tanguay S, Bladou F, Andonian S. Incorporation of the da Vinci surgical skills simulator at urology objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs): a pilot study. Can J Urol. 2016;23(1):8160–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 2.Noureldin YA, Fahmy N, Anidjar M, Andonian S. Is there a place for virtual reality simulators in assessment of competency in percutaneous renal access? World J Urol. 2016;34(5):733–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 3.Noureldin YA, Elkoushy MA, Fahmy N, Carrier S, Elhilali MM, Andonian S. Assessment of photoselective vaporization of prostate skills during urology objective structured clinical examinations (OSCE). Can Urol Assoc J. 2015;9(1–2):e61–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 4.Wiggins G, McTighe J. Understanding by design. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD); 2005.Google Scholar
- 5.McTighe J, Wiggins G. Understanding by design® framework. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD); 2012. Accessed online on June 1st 2017 from the website http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/siteASCD/publications/UbD_WhitePaper0312.pdf.Google Scholar
- 6.American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education. Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association; 2014.Google Scholar
- 7.Millo Y, George I, Seymour N, Smith R, Petinaux O. Guidelines for simulation development: a set of recommendations for preferred characteristics of surgical simulation; developed by the technology and simulation committee of the accredited education institutes consortium; 2014. Accessed online on June 1st 2017 from the website https://www.facs.org/~/media/files/education/aei/guidelines%20for%20simulation%20interactive.ashx.
- 8.Hananel D, Sweet RM, Stubbs J. Simulator development – from idea to prototype to product. In: Aggarwal R, Korndorfer J, Cannon-Bowers J, editors. ACS principles and practice for simulation and surgical education research. 1st ed. Chicago: American College of Surgeons; 2015. p. 138–52.Google Scholar
- 9.Hananel, D. Sweet, R. Deconstructing fidelity for simulation in healthcare. Submitted to Simulation in Healthcare.Google Scholar
- 10.Rooney D, Cooke J, Hananel D. The creation of a simulator value index tool by connected consensus. Simul Healthc. 2014;9(6):427. DOI 10.1097/01.SIH.0000459322.91351.95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.BioGears Human Physiology Engine. Accessed online on May 30th from the website https://www.ara.com/projects/biogears-human-physiology-engine.
- 12.Sweet RM. The CREST simulation development process: training the next generation. J Endourol. 2017;31(S1):S69–75. DOI 10.1089/end.2016.0613. Epub 2016 Dec 22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 13.Sweet RM, Hananel D, Lawrenz F. A unified approach to validation, reliability, and education study design for surgical technical skills training. Arch Surg. 2010;145(2):197–201.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 14.Korndorffer JR, Kasten SJ, Downing SM. Validity and reliability. In: Tsuda ST, Scott DJ, Jones DB, editors. Textbook of simulation: skills and team training. 1st ed. Woodbury: Ciné-Med Publishing; 2012. p. 81–4.Google Scholar