PubMed | 2 Ohio Supercomputer Center and Ohio State University
Type: Journal Article | Journal: Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery | Year: 2016
Objective The aim of this report is to provide a review of the current literature for assessment of performance for mastoidectomy, to identify the current assessment tools available in the literature, and to summarize the evidence for their validity. Data Sources The MEDLINE database was accessed via PubMed. Review Methods Inclusion criteria consisted of English-language published articles that reported use of a mastoidectomy performance assessment tool. Studies ranged from 2007 to November 2015 and were divided into 2 groups: intraoperative assessments and those performed with simulation (cadaveric laboratory or virtual reality). Studies that contained specific reliability analyses were also highlighted. For each publication, validity evidence data were analyzed and interpreted according to conceptual definitions provided in a recent systematic review on the modern framework of validity evidence. Conclusions Twenty-three studies were identified that met our inclusion criteria for review, including 4 intraoperative objective assessment studies, 5 cadaveric studies, 10 virtual reality simulation studies, and 4 that used both cadaveric assessment and virtual reality. Implications for Practice A review of the literature revealed a wide variety of mastoidectomy assessment tools and varying levels of reliability and validity evidence. The assessment tool developed at Johns Hopkins possesses the most validity evidence of those reviewed. However, a number of agreed-on specific metrics could be integrated into a standardized assessment instrument to be used nationally. A universally agreed-on assessment tool will provide a means for developing standardized benchmarks for performing mastoid surgery.