Search

Background: Elbow arthroscopy has increased in frequency as its indications have widened. Despite this growth, a learning curve has not yet been defined., Hypothesis: We hypothesized that there would be significant differences in perspective between trainees and established surgeons for the number of cases needed to reach each skill level and what they felt are the most valuable training tools., Methods: Orthopedic attending physicians and trainees were asked to complete a questionnaire assessing participant demographics, case volumes required to reach defined skill levels (novice, safe, competent, proficient, and expert), and the efficacy of various learning methodologies for elbow arthroscopy. The value of educational methods was assessed using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not at all valuable; 5 = extremely valuable)., Results: The study population consisted of 323 total participants, of whom 224 (69.3%) were attending surgeons and 99 (30.7%) were trainees (resident or fellow physicians). According to the attending physicians, the mean numbers of cases needed to reach each skill level were 19 to be safe, 42 to be competent, 93 to be proficient, and 230 to be expert. These case numbers were not significantly different from the perspectives of trainees. Across the respondents, there were no significant differences in the number of cases needed to reach each level of skill based on the respondents' level of training, years of experience, type of fellowship, or self-reported skill level.Although both groups highly valued live surgery (4.7 of 5) and cadaveric practice (4.6 of 5) for acquiring skill, attendings placed higher value on reading (4.0 vs. 3.3, P < .001), videos/live demos (4.2 vs. 3.6, P < .001), and formal courses (4.5 vs. 4.1, P < .001) than trainees. Both groups place relatively low value on surgical simulators (2.8-3.6)., Conclusions: There was considerable agreement among attending surgeons and trainees in terms of the number of cases needed to attain various skill levels of elbow arthroscopy, which was consistent regardless of fellowship background, self-reported skill level, career length, and elbow arthroscopy case volume. However, there was some disagreement between attending surgeons and trainees over the most valuable methods for acquiring surgical skill with trainees placing less value on textbooks, surgical videos, and formal courses compared with attending surgeons. An understanding of the elbow arthroscopy learning curve will help trainees and their training programs establish case volume targets before safe, independent practice. Future studies should aim to clinically validate this learning curve., (Copyright © 2020 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)