Perspectives on simulation-based assessment of operative skill in surgical training

The perspectives of the wider surgical community toward simulation-based assessment (SBA) in training is a gap in the literature. This study aims to explore the factors associated with the acceptable use of SBA in surgical training, through the perceptions and experiences of a broad range of stakeholder representatives, building on findings from a review of the published literature.

Ten semi-structured interviews were conducted, using a sequential transformative qualitative methods approach, with representatives from identified key stakeholder groups; executive management, risk management, a practicing surgeon, an anaesthesiologist, a theatre-nursing representative, a representative from simulation industry, a patient, a medical student, a junior surgical trainee, and a senior surgical trainee. Interview transcripts underwent reflexive thematic analysis using an inductive and constructivist framework (NVIVO software, NVIVO 12, QSR International).

Four themes emerged: the 'need' for SBA, the concept of a 'minimum standard', the 'optimum design' of an SBA framework, and 'fairness'. SBA is a potential solution to challenges in the current training environment. It emerged that it should not replace trainer judgement, but could ensure that trainees meet a minimum operative competency standard. SBA should be used to identify underperforming trainees early in training to provide targeted remediation. The application of SBA in high-stakes settings such as trainee selection, autonomy granting, and end-of training certification has perceived benefits over current assessment methods.

This study builds on findings from prior research to explore factors regarding the acceptable use of simulation as an assessment method in surgical training, including perspectives from a broad range of stakeholder representatives. Findings can inform the development of simulation-based assessment curricula in surgical training.