Face, Content, and Construct Validity Evaluation of Simulation Models in General Surgery Laparoscopic Training and Education: A Systematic Review

• Published in: Surgical innovation 2023-04, Vol.30 (2), p.251-260
• Main Authors: Rueda Esteban, Roberto J., López-McCormick, Juan S., Rodríguez-Bermeo, Alejandra S., Andrade, Mateo, Hernández Restrepo, Juan D., Targarona Soler, Eduardo M.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• ISSN: 1553-3506; 1553-3514
• DOI: 10.1177/15533506221123704

Background Laparoscopic technical surgical skills (LTS) are considered a fundamental competence for General Surgery residents. Several simulation tools (ST) have been explored to develop LTS. Although a plethora of systematic reviews evaluate the translation of LTS developed in simulation to real surgery, there is a lack of evidence that clarifies effectiveness of different validated ST in acquisition of LTS in surgical residents. The aim of this systematic review (SR) is to summarize published evidence on ST validation used for surgery education and training. Methods A protocol was published in PROSPERO. A SR was carried out following PRISMA guidelines. Complete published articles in English or Spanish that validate either content or construct, plus another form of validation of ST to acquire LTS in general surgery were included. Articles that used only one validation or did not validate an ST were excluded. Results 1052 publications were initially identified across all searched databases. Title review identified 204 studies eligible for full text screening. 10 studies were included for final review. Two studies assessed both face and content, 4 face and construct, and 4 face, content and construct validity. None of the studies presented comparable outcomes due to metrics variation and scores used for the validation strategies. Conclusions This study assessed validated laparoscopic simulation models, particularly in content and construct validity. Articles reported an increased use of simulation models in laparoscopic training with positive feedback from trainees, but few studies reported validation of training model. Validation strategies are not standardized, limiting comparability between them.