Search

Purpose: To create and empirically verify a taxonomy of metrics for assessing surgical technical skills, and to determine which types of metrics, skills, settings, learners, models, and instruments were most commonly reported in the technical skills assessment literature., Method: In 2011-2012, the authors used a rational analysis of existing and emerging metrics to create the taxonomy, and used PubMed to conduct a systematic literature review (2001-2011) to test the taxonomy's comprehensiveness and verifiability. Using 202 articles identified from the review, the authors classified metrics according to the taxonomy and coded data concerning their context and use. Frequencies (counts, percentages) were calculated for all variables., Results: The taxonomy contained 12 objective and 4 subjective categories. Of 567 metrics identified in the literature, 520 (92%) were classified using the new taxonomy. Process metrics outnumbered outcome metrics by 8:1. The most frequent metrics were "time," "manual techniques" (objective and subjective), "errors," and "procedural steps." Only one new metric, "learning curve," emerged. Assessments of basic motor skills and skills germane to laparoscopic surgery dominated the literature. Novices, beginners, and intermediate learners were the most frequent subjects, and box trainers and virtual reality simulators were the most frequent models used for assessing performance., Conclusions: Metrics convey what is valued in human performance. This taxonomy provides a common nomenclature. It may help educators and researchers in procedurally oriented disciplines to use metrics more precisely and consistently. Future assessments should focus more on bedside tasks and open surgical procedures and should include more outcome metrics.

The field of graduate medical education (GME) research is attracting increased attention and broader participation. The authors review the special ethical and methodological considerations pertaining to medical education research. Because residents are at once a convenient and captive study population, a risk of coercion exists, making the provision of consent important. The role of the institutional review board (IRB) is often difficult to discern because GME activities can have multiple simultaneous purposes, educational activities may go forward with or without a research component, and the subjects of educational research studies are not patients. The authors provide a road map for researchers with regard to research oversight by the IRB and also address issues related to research quality. The matters of whether educational research studies should have educational value for the study subject and whether to use individual information obtained when residents participate as research subjects are explored.