Purpose

Surgical training is based on an apprenticeship model. This training can be divided broadly into three main categories: practical skills, knowledge and decision making. The operating room is the nexus of a large part of surgical teaching. The supervising surgeon imparts both practical teaching as well as didactic information to the trainee during surgical procedures. A large amount of decision making skills are also acquired in the OR. Indeed, a large part of the surgical teams time is spent in the operating room which makes it an ideal educational environment.

Bench model training is one teaching modality whereby the novice surgeon is taught surgical skills on life-like models. This practice enhances and accelerates the ability of the trainee to acquire fundamental, technical and surgical skills in the operating room. Whether bench model training provides an advantage on the ability of the trainee to acquire knowledge and decision making skills is unknown. Based on the motor learning theories, it is hypothesized that bench-model training will allow junior residents to be more interactive than trainees lacking similar active hands-on training. In this study, we examined whether bench model training provides an advantage on the ability of the trainee to acquire knowledge and decision making skills.

Rapid advances in computer-assisted surgery (CAS) have lead to increasing integration of this technology into the orthopaedic training environment. The real-time feedback provided by CAS improves performance; however, it may be detrimental to learning. The primary purpose of this study is to determine if the form of feedback provided by computer-assisted technology (concurrent visual feedback) compromises the learning of surgical skills in the trainee.

Forty-five residents and senior medical students were randomised to one of three training groups and learned technical skills related to total hip replacement. The “Conventional Training” (CT) group self-determined acetabular cup position and were then corrected with traditional hand-over-hand repositioning. The “Computer Navigation” (CN) group used CAS to self-determine cup position. The “Knowledge of Results” (KR) group self-determined cup position and when satisfied used CAS for optimal repositioning. Outcomes (accuracy and precision of cup placement in abduction and anteversion, and time to position) were assessed in a pre-test, ten minute and six week retention and transfer tests. All retention and transfer tests were performed without CAS.

There were no differences between the groups at pre-test. All groups demonstrated an improvement in accuracy and precision of abduction angle and version angle determination during training (p < 0.001). The CN group demonstrated significantly better accuracy and precision in early training (p < 0.05), and better precision throughout training (p < 0.05). While the CN group demonstrated a decrease in precision during transfer testing it was not found to differ significantly from the other groups. No significant degradation in performance was observed between immediate and delayed testing for any group suggesting no negative effects of the tested training modalities on learning.

In this study the concurrent augmented feedback provided by CAS resulted in improved early performance without a compromise in learning, however, further investigation is required to ensure CAS does not compromise trainee learning. Until this issue is clarified, educators need to be aware of this potential effect.