title: Evidence-based microsurgical skills acquisition series part 2: validated assessment instruments--a systematic review.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To systematically review literature pertaining to microsurgical skill assessment tools to determine those specific to, and validated for, microsurgery training.
  
  
  METHODS
  Multiple databases were searched with preset terms. The search dates included all years up to May 2014. The eligibility criteria included the presence of statistical comparison with a control group and the presence of a measure of validation. The articles and their references were independently reviewed by 2 assessors. Each assessment tool was evaluated for content, construct, face, and criterion validities as well observation/expectant bias and interrater/intrarater reliability. For individual studies, we screened for expectant and selection bias.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Of the 261 articles reviewed, 10 articles and 1 abstract were included. Those excluded were predominantly assessment tools that did not evaluate microsurgical skill or articles where no assessment tool was described. The assessment tools identified in this review include a self-assessment tool where trainees rate their skill confidence from 1 to 5, stereoscopic visual acuity as a predictor for microsurgical performance, an objective motion-tracking electronic device--the Imperial College of Surgical Assessment Device, and 6 global rating scales. Content, construct, and face validities were consistently demonstrated in addition to observation/expectant bias and interrater reliability. Criterion validity was only demonstrated for half of the instruments and intrarater reliability for only 1.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Overall, 10 articles and 1 abstract described validated methods. Reliability and validity were demonstrated by 6 global rating scales (University of Western Ontario microsurgical skills acquisition, structured assessment of microsurgery skills, and video-based objective structured assessment of technical skill). Motion analysis using the Imperial College of Surgical Assessment Device is a valid objective measure of skill.
authors.affiliation: Section of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
authors.forename: Danielle
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Dumestre
authors.affiliation: Section of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
authors.forename: Justin K
authors.initials: JK
authors.lastname: Yeung
authors.affiliation: Section of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Electronic address: Claire.Temple-Oberle@albertahealthservices.ca.
authors.forename: Claire
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Temple-Oberle
mesh_terms: D002983:Clinical Competence; D003867:Depth Perception; D006801:Humans; D007396:Internship and Residency; D008866:Microsurgery / Q000193:education*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D013647:Task Performance and Analysis
keywords: Medical Knowledge; Patient Care; Practice-Based Learning and Improvement; assessment; education; microsurgery; models; teaching; validity of results