Skip to main content

Monitoring Performance and Progression in the Operating Theatre

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Effective Training of Arthroscopic Skills

Abstract

Although previous chapters indicated the potential and benefits of training arthroscopic skills in simulated environments, training needs to be continued in the operating room to achieve the necessary proficiency. Based on the theory on learning strategies in Chap. 4, it is posed that if residents indeed acquire the basic skills before they enter the operating room, the focus in the operating room can be on more complex tasks. This requires the formulation of guidelines that determine the level that qualifies proficiency. For the actual cases in the operating room, this is a difficult task as the level of complexity of the procedure plays an important role, and proficiency is not necessarily defined as the summation of several part-task skills, but rather requires a holistic approach.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Bibliography

  • Aggarwal R, Grantcharov T, Moorthy K, Milland T, Papasavas P, Dosis A, Bello F, Darzi A (2007) An evaluation of the feasibility, validity, and reliability of laparoscopic skills assessment in the operating room. Ann Surg 245(6):992ā€“999, available from: PM:17522527

    ArticleĀ  PubMed CentralĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Alvand A, Khan T, Al-Ali S, Jackson WF, Price AJ, Rees JL (2012) Simple visual parameters for objective assessment of arthroscopic skill. J Bone Joint Surg Am 94(13):e97, available from: PM:22760398

    ArticleĀ  CASĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Alvand A, Logishetty K, Middleton R, Khan T, Jackson WF, Price AJ, Rees JL (2013) Validating a global rating scale to monitor individual resident learning curves during arthroscopic knee meniscal repair. Arthroscopy 29(5):906ā€“912, available from: PM:23628663

    ArticleĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Backstein D, Agnidis Z, Regehr G, Reznick R (2004) The effectiveness of video feedback in the acquisition of orthopedic technical skills. Am J Surg 187(3):427ā€“432, available from: PM:15006577

    ArticleĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Backstein D, Agnidis Z, Sadhu R, MacRae H (2005) Effectiveness of repeated video feedback in the acquisition of a surgical technical skill. Can J Surg 48(3):195ā€“200, available from: PM:16013622

    PubMed CentralĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Blom EM, Verdaasdonk EG, Stassen LP, Stassen HG, Wieringa PA, Dankelman J (2007) Analysis of verbal communication during teaching in the operating room and the potentials for surgical training. Surg Endosc 21(9):1560ā€“1566, available from: PM:17285367

    ArticleĀ  CASĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Blum T, Feussner H, Navab N (2010) Modeling and segmentation of surgical workflow from laparoscopic video. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 13(Pt 3):400ā€“407, available from: PM:20879425

    PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Bouarfa L, Akman O, Schneider A, Jonker PP, Dankelman J (2012) In-vivo real-time tracking of surgical instruments in endoscopic video. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 21(3):129ā€“134, available from: PM:21574828

    ArticleĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Bouarfa L, Dankelman J (2012) Workflow mining and outlier detection from clinical activity logs. J Biomed Inform 45(6):1185ā€“1190, available from: PM:22925724

    ArticleĀ  CASĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Bouarfa L, Jonker PP, Dankelman J (2011) Discovery of high-level tasks in the operating room. J Biomed Inform 44(3):455ā€“462, available from: PM:20060495

    ArticleĀ  CASĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Bridges M, Diamond DL (1999) The financial impact of teaching surgical residents in the operating room. Am J Surg 177(1):28ā€“32, available from: PM:10037304

    ArticleĀ  CASĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Castricini R, De Benedetto M, Orlando N, Rocchi M, Zini R, Pirani P (2013) Arthroscopic Latarjet procedure: analysis of the learning curve. Musculoskelet Surg 97(Suppl 1):93ā€“98, available from: PM:23588833

    ArticleĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Chami G, Ward J, Wills D, Phillips R, Sherman K (2006) Smart tool for force measurements during knee arthroscopy: in vivo human study. Stud Health Technol Inform 119:85ā€“89, available from: PM:16404020

    CASĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Chami G, Ward JW, Phillips R, Sherman KP (2008) Haptic feedback can provide an objective assessment of arthroscopic skills. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466(4):963ā€“968, available from: PM:18213507

    ArticleĀ  PubMed CentralĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • den Boer KT, Bruijn M, Jaspers JE, Stassen LP, Erp WF, Jansen A, Go PM, Dankelman J, Gouma DJ (2002) Time-action analysis of instrument positioners in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 16(1):142ā€“147, available from: PM:11961625

    ArticleĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Doignon C, Graebling P, de Mathelin M (2005) Real-time segmentation of surgical instruments inside the abdominal cavity using a joint hue saturation color feature. Real Time Imaging 11:429ā€“442

    ArticleĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Dosis A, Aggarwal R, Bello F, Moorthy K, Munz Y, Gillies D, Darzi A (2005) Synchronized video and motion analysis for the assessment of procedures in the operating theater. Arch Surg 140:293ā€“299

    ArticleĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Elliott MJ, Caprise PA, Henning AE, Kurtz CA, Sekiya JK (2012) Diagnostic knee arthroscopy: a pilot study to evaluate surgical skills. Arthroscopy 28(2):218ā€“224, available from: PM:22035780

    ArticleĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Farnworth LR, Lemay DE, Wooldridge T, Mabrey JD, Blaschak MJ, DeCoster TA, Wascher DC, Schenck RC Jr (2001) A comparison of operative times in arthroscopic ACL reconstruction between orthopaedic faculty and residents: the financial impact of orthopaedic surgical training in the operating room. Iowa Orthop J 21:31ā€“35, available from: PM:11813948

    CASĀ  PubMed CentralĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Guttmann D, Graham RD, MacLennan MJ, Lubowitz JH (2005) Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: the learning curve. Arthroscopy 21(4):394ā€“400, available from: PM:15800517

    ArticleĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Harewood GC, Murray F, Winder S, Patchett S (2008) Evaluation of formal feedback on endoscopic competence among trainees: the EFFECT trial. Ir J Med Sci 177(3):253ā€“256, available from: PM:18584274

    ArticleĀ  CASĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Hodgins JL, Veillette C (2013) Arthroscopic proficiency: methods in evaluating competency. BMC Med Educ 13:61, available from: PM:23631421

    ArticleĀ  PubMed CentralĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Hoppe DJ, de Sa D, Simunovic N, Bhandari M, Safran MR, Larson CM, Ayeni OR (2014) The learning curve for hip arthroscopy: a systematic review. Arthroscopy, available from: PM:24461140

    Google ScholarĀ 

  • Howells NR, Gill HS, Carr AJ, Price AJ, Rees JL (2008) Transferring simulated arthroscopic skills to the operating theatre: a randomised blinded study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 90(4):494ā€“499, available from: PM:18378926

    ArticleĀ  CASĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Insel A, Carofino B, Leger R, Arciero R, Mazzocca AD (2009) The development of an objective model to assess arthroscopic performance. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91(9):2287ā€“2295, available from: PM:19724008

    ArticleĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Koehler RJ, Amsdell S, Arendt EA, Bisson LJ, Braman JP, Butler A, Cosgarea AJ, Harner CD, Garrett WE, Olson T, Warme WJ, Nicandri GT (2013) The arthroscopic surgical skill evaluation tool (ASSET). Am J Sports Med 41(6):1229ā€“1237, available from: PM:23548808

    ArticleĀ  PubMed CentralĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Koehler RJ, Nicandri GT (2013) Using the arthroscopic surgery skill evaluation tool as a pass-fail examination. J Bone Joint Surg Am 95(23):e1871ā€“e1876, available from: PM:24306710

    ArticleĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Mabrey JD, Gillogly SD, Kasser JR, Sweeney HJ, Zarins B, Mevis H, Garrett WE Jr, Poss R, Cannon WD (2002) Virtual reality simulation of arthroscopy of the knee. Arthroscopy 18(6):E28, available from: PM:12098110

    ArticleĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Martin JA, Regehr G, Reznick R, MacRae H, Murnaghan J, Hutchison C, Brown M (1997) Objective structured assessment of technical skill (OSATS) for surgical residents. Br J Surg 84(2):273ā€“278, available from: PM:9052454

    ArticleĀ  CASĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Matziolis G, Krocker D, Weiss U, Tohtz S, Perka C (2007) A prospective, randomized study of computer-assisted and conventional total knee arthroplasty. Three-dimensional evaluation of implant alignment and rotation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89(2):236ā€“243, available from: PM:17272435

    ArticleĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Minekus JP, Rozing PM, Valstar ER, Dankelman J (2003) Evaluation of humeral head replacements using time-action analysis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 12(2):152ā€“157, available from: PM:12700568

    ArticleĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Moon YW, Ha CW, Do KH, Kim CY, Han JH, Na SE, Lee CH, Kim JG, Park YS (2012) Comparison of robot-assisted and conventional total knee arthroplasty: a controlled cadaver study using multiparameter quantitative three-dimensional CT assessment of alignment. Comput Aided Surg 17(2):86ā€“95, available from: PM:22348661

    ArticleĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Morris AH, Jennings JE, Stone RG, Katz JA, Garroway RY, Hendler RC (1993) Guidelines for privileges in arthroscopic surgery. Arthroscopy 9(1):125ā€“127, available from: PM:8442822

    ArticleĀ  CASĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Oā€™Connor A, Schwaitzberg SD, Cao CG (2008) How much feedback is necessary for learning to suture? Surg Endosc 22(7):1614ā€“1619, available from: PM:17973165

    ArticleĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Oā€™Neill PJ, Cosgarea AJ, Freedman JA, Queale WS, McFarland EG (2002) Arthroscopic proficiency: a survey of orthopaedic sports medicine fellowship directors and orthopaedic surgery department chairs. Arthroscopy 18(7):795ā€“800, available from: PM:12209439

    ArticleĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Olson T, Koehler R, Butler A, Amsdell S, Nicandri G (2013) Is there a valid and reliable assessment of diagnostic knee arthroscopy skill? Clin Orthop Relat Res 471(5):1670ā€“1676, available from: PM:23254692

    ArticleĀ  PubMed CentralĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Padoy N, Blum T, Ahmadi SA, Feussner H, Berger MO, Navab N (2012) Statistical modeling and recognition of surgical workflow. Med Image Anal 16(3):632ā€“641, available from: PM:21195015

    ArticleĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Pedowitz RA, Esch J, Snyder S (2002) Evaluation of a virtual reality simulator for arthroscopy skills development. Arthroscopy 18(6):E29, available from: PM:12098111

    ArticleĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Prince M (2004) Does active learning work? A review of the research. J Eng Educ 93(3):223ā€“231

    ArticleĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Reznick R, Regehr G, MacRae H, Martin J, McCulloch W (1997) Testing technical skill via an innovative ā€œbench stationā€ examination. Am J Surg 173(3):226ā€“230, available from: PM:9124632

    ArticleĀ  CASĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Rosenberger RE, Hoser C, Quirbach S, Attal R, Hennerbichler A, Fink C (2008) Improved accuracy of component alignment with the implementation of image-free navigation in total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg SportsTraumatol Arthrosc 16(3):249ā€“257, available from: PM:18157493

    ArticleĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Savoie FH III (2007) Guidelines to becoming an expert elbow arthroscopist. Arthroscopy 23(11):1237ā€“1240, available from: PM:17986413

    ArticleĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Sjoerdsma W, Meijer DW, Jansen A, den Boer KT, Grimbergen CA (2000) Comparison of efficiencies of three techniques for colon surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 10(1):47ā€“53, available from: PM:10706303

    ArticleĀ  CASĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Slade Shantz JA, Leiter JR, Collins JB, MacDonald PB (2013) Validation of a global assessment of arthroscopic skills in a cadaveric knee model. Arthroscopy 29(1):106ā€“112, available from: PM:23177383

    ArticleĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Tuijthof GJ, de Vaal MM, Sierevelt IN, Blankevoort L, van der List MP (2011) Performance of arthroscopic irrigation systems assessed with automatic blood detection. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19(11):1948ā€“1954, available from: PM:21479643

    ArticleĀ  CASĀ  PubMed CentralĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Tuijthof GJ, Sierevelt IN, van Dijk CN (2007) Disturbances in the arthroscopic view defined with video analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 15(9):1101ā€“1106, available from: PM:17410346

    ArticleĀ  CASĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Tuijthof GJ, van den Boomen H, van Heerwaarden RJ, van Dijk CN (2008) Comparison of two arthroscopic pump systems based on image quality. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 16(6):590ā€“594, available from: PM:18322672

    ArticleĀ  CASĀ  PubMed CentralĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

  • Van Oldenrijk J, Schafroth MU, Bhandari M, Runne WC, Poolman RW (2008) Time-action analysis (TAA) of the surgical technique implanting the collum femoris preserving (CFP) hip arthroplasty. TAASTIC trial identifying pitfalls during the learning curve of surgeons participating in a subsequent randomized controlled trial (an observational study). BMC Musculoskelet Disord 9:93, available from: PM:18577202

    ArticleĀ  PubMed CentralĀ  PubMedĀ  Google ScholarĀ 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gabriƫlle J. M. Tuijthof .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendices

Appendix 13.A Orthopaedic Competence Assessment Project

Skill

Score 1

Score 2

Score 3

Score 4

Score 5

Follows protocol

Unsatisfactory

Ā 

Adequate. Occasional need for guidance and help

Ā 

Excellent adherence to agreed protocol. No prompts. No mistakes

Handles tissue well

Careless. Potential to cause damage

Ā 

Adequate. No tissue damage. Occasional need for increased care

Ā 

Excellent tissue handling. Precise and delicate

Appropriate and safe use of instruments

Dangerous. Risk to patient and assistant. Potential for damage to equipment

Ā 

Adequate use of instruments and scope. Occasional guidance to ensure instruments remain within field of vision

Ā 

Excellent use of instruments. Good control of arthroscope. Instruments constantly within field of vision

Appropriate pace with economy of movement

Erratic pace and movements. Overly rushing or inappropriately slow

Ā 

Adequate economy of movement. Majority of movements controlled and careful. Occasional erratic movement

Ā 

Excellent fluidity and economy of movement. Procedure performed at appropriate pace without erratic movements

Act calmly and effectively with untoward events

Unable to deal with adverse events. Panic and inability to respond

Ā 

Remains calm. Remains safe. Takes advice from supervisor. Unable to cope independently

Ā 

Excellent ability to cope with adverse events. Remains calm. Deals with complication independently

Appropriate use of assistant

Fails to involve assistant appropriately. Resultant poor positioning. Poor rapport

Ā 

Asks for appropriate joint position at appropriate times. Unable to suggest alternative positions to improve view/access

Ā 

Excellent use of assistant. Good rapport. Able to constantly modify input of assistant to best advantage throughout procedure

Communicates with scrubs nurse

Inappropriate communication resulting in confusion or operative delay

Ā 

Appropriate communication with scrub nurse. Occasional need for clarification from supervisor

Ā 

Excellent rapport with scrub nurse. Clear and effective communication, maximising procedural efficiency

Clearly identifies common abnormalities

Unable to identify common abnormalities. Confusion over basic anatomy

Ā 

Adequate identification of common pathology. Occasional mistake. Unsure of precise classifications

Ā 

Excellent knowledge of pathology of common abnormalities. Clear understanding of classification of injuries

Protecting the articular surface

Inability to protect articular surface appropriately. Potential to cause damage

Ā 

Awareness of need to protect articular surface. Adequate care taken. Occasional prompt from supervisor required

Ā 

Excellent awareness of articular surfaces. High degree of care maintained throughout the procedure

Appendix 13.B Basic Arthroscopic Knee Skill Scoring System

Skill

Score 1

Score 2

Score 3

Score 4

Score 5

Dissection

Appeared excessively hesitant, caused trauma to tissues, did not dissect into correct anatomical plan

Ā 

Controlled and safe dissection into correct anatomical plane, caused minimal trauma to tissues

Ā 

Superior and atraumatic dissection into the correct anatomical plane

Instrument handling

Repeatedly makes tentative or awkward movements with instruments

Ā 

Competent use of instruments, although occasionally appeared stuff or awkward

Ā 

Fluid moves with instruments and no awkwardness

Depth perception

Constantly overshoots target, slow to correct

Ā 

Some overshooting or missing of target

Ā 

Accurately directs instruments in the correct plane to target

Bimanual dexterity

Noticeably awkward with non-dominant hand, poor coordination between hands

Ā 

Uses both hands but does not maximise interaction between hands

Ā 

Expertly uses both hands in complementary manner to provide optimum performance

Flow of operation and forward planning

Frequently stopped operating or needed to discuss next move

Ā 

Demonstrated ability for forward planning with steady progression of operative procedure

Ā 

Obviously planned course of operation with effortless flow from one move to the next

Knowledge of instruments

Frequently asked for the wrong instrument or used inappropriate instrument

Ā 

Knew the names of most instruments and used appropriate instrument for the task

Ā 

Obviously familiar with the instruments required and their names

Efficiency

Many unnecessary, inefficient movements. Constantly changing focus or persisting without progress

Ā 

Slow, but planned movements are reasonably organised with few unnecessary or repetitive movements

Ā 

Confident, clear economy of movement and maximum efficiency

Knowledge of specific procedure

Deficient knowledge, needed specific instruction at most operative steps

Ā 

Knew all important aspects of the operation

Ā 

Demonstrated familiarity with all aspects of the operation

Autonomy

Unable to complete entire task, even with verbal guidance

Ā 

Able to complete task safely with moderate guidance

Ā 

Able to complete task independently without prompting

Quality of final product

Very poor

Ā 

Competent

Ā 

Clearly superior

Appendix 13.C Arthroscopic Skills Assessment

Start time

Stop time

Total time

Landmark

To be visualised

Score

Suprapatellar pouch

View all areas of pouch

(3)

Patella

View medial facet

(3)

Ā 

View lateral facets

(3)

Trochlea

View trochlear surface

(4)

Medical recess

View medial gutter/assess meniscal synovial junction

(4)

Lateral recess

View lateral gutter/assess meniscal junction/popliteus

(4)

Medial compartment

Assess condyle for chondral lesions

(5)

Ā 

Meniscus/view anterior, middle, posterior

(5)

Ā 

Probe superior and inferior surface

(10)

Intercondylar notch

View and inspect ACL

(5)

Ā 

View and inspect PCL

(5)

Lateral compartment

Assess condyle for chondral lesions

(5)

Ā 

Meniscus/view anterior, middle, posterior

(5)

Ā 

Probe superior and inferior surface

(10)

Ā 

View popliteus tendon

(4)

Ā 

Missed items

Scope score

Time

Time penalty

Total time score

Ā Ā 

Total score

Appendix 13.D Objective Assessment of Arthroscopic Skills

Skill

Novice

Advanced beginner

Competent

Proficient

Expert

Examining/manipulating joint

Did not examine joint or position to give improved visualisation during procedure

Examined joint without diagnostic abilities and lacked ability to facilitate view by positioning

Positioned knee appropriately after some difficulty with visualisation

Used common positioning to facilitate view during arthroscopy

Used accepted and novel positioning to perform the arthroscopy effortlessly

Triangulating instruments

Could not insert instruments into ports and maintain them in view. Unable to locate instrument tips without difficulty

Unable to maintain instrument in field of view consistently

Found instruments with delay. Field of view wandered from operative site but returned

Found instruments quickly and began work. Occasionally delayed in orienting camera to afford better visualisation

Immediately located instruments and began work without delay. Kept instrument in field of view at all times

Controlling fluid flow and joint distension

Under-/overdistended joint consistently due to inappropriate matching of suction and flow.

Achieved proper distension after delays. Some extravasation into tissue due to overdistension

Distended joint adequately after initial loss of pressure during suction

Joint distended appropriately through control of flow and suction

Minimal fluid extravasated with constantly maintained field of view

Maintaining field of view

Often disoriented. Was unable to adjust scope to improve visualisation

Maintained field of view part of the time

Maintained and adjusted arthroscope to provide maximal view with some difficulty

Maintained field of view in same portal

Changed portals quickly to improve visualisation

Controlling instruments

Was unable to perform tasks with provided instruments. Caused cartilage damage

Repeatedly made tentative or awkward moves with instruments

Competently used instruments although occasionally appeared stiff or awkward

Used instruments appropriately and efficiently

Made fluid moves with instruments and used some instruments in novel ways to increase efficiency

Economising time and planning forward

Was unable to complete any portion of the procedure

Was able to complete components of the procedure, but needed to discuss next move

Completed all components of the operation with some unnecessary moves

Was efficient, but continued discovering new time saving motions

Showed economy of movement and maximum efficiency

Overall

Possessed rudimentary arthroscopic skills with only basic anatomical and mechanical understanding

Knew basic steps of procedure and performed some independently

Performed the procedure independently

Performed procedure with changes to improve efficiency

Performed the procedure with minimal chance to improve efficiency

Complexity

No difficulties

Slightly difficult

Moderately difficult

Considerable difficulty

Critical

Appendix 13.E Arthroscopic Surgical Skill Evaluation Tool

Skill

Score 1

Score 2

Score 3

Score 4

Score 5

Safety

Significant damage to articular cartilage or soft tissue

Ā 

Insignificant damage to articular cartilage or soft tissue

Ā 

No damage to articular cartilage or soft tissue

Field of view

Narrow field of view, inadequate arthroscope or light source positioning

Ā 

Moderate field of view, adequate arthroscope and light source positioning

Ā 

Expansive field of view, optimal arthroscope and light source positioning

Camera dexterity

Awkward or graceless movements, fails to keep camera centred and correctly oriented

Ā 

Appropriate use of camera, occasionally needs to reposition

Ā 

Graceful and dexterous throughout procedure with camera always centred and correctly

Instrument dexterity

Overly tentative or awkward with instruments, unable to consistently direct instruments to targets

Ā 

Careful, controlled use of instruments, occasionally misses targets

Ā 

Confident and accurate use of all instruments

Bimanual dexterity

Unable to use both hands or no coordination between hands

Ā 

Uses both hands but occasionally fails to coordinate movement of camera and instruments

Ā 

Uses both hands to coordinate camera and instrument positioning for optimal performance

Flow of procedure

Frequently stops operating or persists without progress, multiple unsuccessful attempts prior to completing tasks

Ā 

Steady progression of operative procedure with few unsuccessful attempts prior to completing tasks

Ā 

Obviously planned course of procedure, fluid transition from one task to the next with no unsuccessful attempts

Quality of procedure

Inadequate or incomplete final product

Ā 

Adequate final product with only minor flaws that do not require correction

Ā 

Optimal final product with no flaws

Autonomy

Unable to complete procedure even with intervention(s)

Ā 

Able to complete procedure but required intervention(s)

Ā 

Able to complete procedure without intervention

Complexity

No difficulty

Ā 

Moderate difficulty (mild inflammation or scarring)

Ā 

Extreme difficulty (severe inflammation or scarring, abnormal anatomy)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

Ā© 2015 ESSKA

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Tuijthof, G.J.M., Sierevelt, I.N. (2015). Monitoring Performance and Progression in the Operating Theatre. In: Karahan, M., Kerkhoffs, G., Randelli, P., Tuijthof, G. (eds) Effective Training of Arthroscopic Skills. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44943-1_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44943-1_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-44942-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-44943-1

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics