↓ Skip to main content

Simulation for Teaching Orthopaedic Residents in a Competency-based Curriculum: Do the Benefits Justify the Increased Costs?

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
126 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Simulation for Teaching Orthopaedic Residents in a Competency-based Curriculum: Do the Benefits Justify the Increased Costs?
Published in
Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, September 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11999-015-4512-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Markku T. Nousiainen, Sydney A. McQueen, Peter Ferguson, Benjamin Alman, William Kraemer, Oleg Safir, Richard Reznick, Ranil Sonnadara

Abstract

Although simulation-based training is becoming widespread in surgical education and research supports its use, one major limitation is cost. Until now, little has been published on the costs of simulation in residency training. At the University of Toronto, a novel competency-based curriculum in orthopaedic surgery has been implemented for training selected residents, which makes extensive use of simulation. Despite the benefits of this intensive approach to simulation, there is a need to consider its financial implications and demands on faculty time. This study presents a cost and faculty work-hours analysis of implementing simulation as a teaching and evaluation tool in the University of Toronto's novel competency-based curriculum program compared with the historic costs of using simulation in the residency training program. All invoices for simulation training were reviewed to determine the financial costs before and after implementation of the competency-based curriculum. Invoice items included costs for cadavers, artificial models, skills laboratory labor, associated materials, and standardized patients. Costs related to the surgical skills laboratory rental fees and orthopaedic implants were waived as a result of special arrangements with the skills laboratory and implant vendors. Although faculty time was not reimbursed, faculty hours dedicated to simulation were also evaluated. The academic year of 2008 to 2009 was chosen to represent an academic year that preceded the introduction of the competency-based curriculum. During this year, 12 residents used simulation for teaching. The academic year of 2010 to 2011 was chosen to represent an academic year when the competency-based curriculum training program was functioning parallel but separate from the regular stream of training. In this year, six residents used simulation for teaching and assessment. The academic year of 2012 to 2013 was chosen to represent an academic year when simulation was used equally among the competency-based curriculum and regular stream residents for teaching (60 residents) and among 14 competency-based curriculum residents and 21 regular stream residents for assessment. The total costs of using simulation to teach and assess all residents in the competency-based curriculum and regular stream programs (academic year 2012-2013) (CDN 155,750, USD 158,050) were approximately 15 times higher than the cost of using simulation to teach residents before the implementation of the competency-based curriculum (academic year 2008-2009) (CDN 10,090, USD 11,140). The number of hours spent teaching and assessing trainees increased from 96 to 317 hours during this period, representing a threefold increase. Although the financial costs and time demands on faculty in running the simulation program in the new competency-based curriculum at the University of Toronto have been substantial, augmented learner and trainer satisfaction has been accompanied by direct evidence of improved and more efficient learning outcomes. The higher costs and demands on faculty time associated with implementing simulation for teaching and assessment must be considered when it is used to enhance surgical training.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 126 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 14 11%
Student > Master 13 10%
Student > Bachelor 13 10%
Researcher 12 10%
Other 12 10%
Other 37 29%
Unknown 25 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 40%
Social Sciences 9 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 6%
Psychology 4 3%
Linguistics 3 2%
Other 17 13%
Unknown 35 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 November 2022.
All research outputs
#7,895,727
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#2,188
of 7,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,907
of 276,996 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#37
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,298 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 276,996 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 118 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.