Excellent Agreement of In-Person Scoring versus Scoring of Digitally Recorded Simulated Suture Skills Examination

This study's objective was to evaluate the agreement between in-person performance scores and digitally recorded assessment scores by the same examiner using a simulated suturing skill examination. With ethics approval, veterinary students underwent a simulated skills examination proctored by an in-person examiner and simultaneously digitally recorded using two wide-angle cameras mounted overtop and to the side of the surgical field. Performance scores were based on a nine-item rubric. In-person examination scores were compared for agreement with those obtained by blind review of the digital recording of the same session, by the same examiner, 6-18 months following the in-person examination. Thirty-nine students were enrolled. All rubric categories could be assessed during digital assessment of the recording from the camera mounted above the surgical area. In two instances, the side digital recording had to be reviewed to confirm correct needle holder grip. Concordance correlation between performance scores from in-person and post hoc digital assessment was excellent (r = .93). The excellent agreement between in-person and digital assessment suggests that digitally recording skills examinations can provide adequate suturing skills assessment, presenting several benefits. Digitally recorded assessment allows for anonymity, which can reduce assessor bias/favoritism, provide a record of performance that students can review and critically self-reflect upon, and reduce the number of in-person examiners required to complete surgical skills examinations. Additionally, digitally recorded assessment could become an option for students who experience anxiety performing a skills exam in the presence of an examiner.