Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-xh428 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-14T20:21:48.767Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Face and content validation of artificial temporal bone dissection for otolaryngology training

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 October 2024

Shadia Hashim Kurichiyil Open the ORCID record for Shadia Hashim Kurichiyil [Opens in a new window] ,
Joshua D. Whittaker Open the ORCID record for Joshua D. Whittaker [Opens in a new window]  and
C. Lucy Dalton
Shadia Hashim Kurichiyil*
Affiliation:
Ear, Nose and Throat, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, University Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
Joshua D. Whittaker
Affiliation:
Ear, Nose and Throat, Worcestershire Acute NHS Trust, Worcester, United Kingdom
C. Lucy Dalton
Affiliation:
Ear, Nose and Throat, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, University Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
*
Corresponding author: Shadia Hashim Kurichiyil; Email: drshadiasam@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

To assess the face and content validity of artificial temporal bone dissection in surgical training in the UK.

Methods

Expert and non-expert groups participated in artificial temporal bone dissection at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK. Face and content validity were assessed by a validated post-dissection questionnaire.

Results

The median content validity score was 34 out of 35 (interquartile range 32.00–35.00). Mean face validity score compared to human was 45.76 out of 65 (95 per cent CI 42.57–48.94). Face validity compared to cadaveric models demonstrated equivalence (95 per cent CI 25.30–30.70, crossing equivalence value 27.00). Experts rated face validity less favourably than non-experts (p = 0.012 and 0.042, respectively). Content validity was equivalent between experts and non-experts (p = 0.052). There were no significant differences in total content (p = 0.606) and face validity (p = 0.133, p = 0.105) scores between different artificial bones.

Conclusion

The high content and face validity suggests ENT training programs should consider formally incorporating artificial models into mastoid surgery training pathways.

Keywords

postdoctoral traininganatomyeducationmiddle ear surgeryneuro-otologyfacial nerve

Information

Type
Main Article
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 139 , Issue 6 , June 2025 , pp. 451 - 457
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of J.L.O. (1984) LIMITED.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

Shadia Hashim Kurichiyil takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper

References

Sanna, M, Russo, A, Taibah, A. The Temporal Bone: Anatomical Dissection and Surgical Approaches. New York: Thieme Medical Publishers, 2018Google Scholar
George, AP, De, R. Review of temporal bone dissection teaching: how it was, is and will be. J Laryngol Otol 2010;124:CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shaw, A, Shea, S. The more you read, the more you know. Paediatr Child Health 2006;11:566CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kotsis, SV, Chung, KC. Application of the “see one, do one, teach one” concept in surgical training. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013;131:CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnoldner, C, Lin, VYW, Chen, JM. Cortical mastoidectomy. In: Manual of Otologic Surgery. Vienna: Springer, 2015;5–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naik, SM, Naik, MS, Bains, NK. Cadaveric temporal bone dissection: is it obsolete today? Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2013;18:CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bhutta, MF. A review of simulation platforms in surgery of the temporal bone. Clin Otolaryngol 2016;41:CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Musbahi, O, Aydin, A, Al Omran, Y, Skilbeck, CJ, Ahmed, K. Current status of simulation in otolaryngology: a systematic review. J Surg Educ 2017;74:CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wiet, GJ, Rastatter, JC, Bapna, S, Packer, M, Stredney, D, Welling, DB. Training otologic surgical skills through simulation-moving toward validation: a pilot study and lessons learned. J Grad Med Educ 2009;1:CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bakhos, D. Development and validation of a temporal bone prototype. J Laryngol Otol 2016;130(suppl 3):S123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ke, J, Ma, F, Zhang, S, Sun, S. The application of surgical simulation system in the middle ear surgery. J Laryngol Otol 2016;130(suppl 3):S188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rajaratnam, V, Rahman, NA, Dong, C. Integrating instructional design principles into surgical skills training models: an innovative approach. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2021;103:CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reddy-Kolanu, G, Alderson, D. Evaluating the effectiveness of the Voxel-Man TempoSurg virtual reality simulator in facilitating learning mastoid surgery. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2011;93:CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aussedat, C, Venail, F, Marx, M, Boullaud, L, Bakhos, D. Training in temporal bone drilling. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis 2022;139:CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bone, TM, Mowry, SE. Content validity of temporal bone models printed via inexpensive methods and materials. Otol Neurotol 2016;37:CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Malik, MU, Varela, DADV, Park, E, Masood, H, Laeeq, K, Bhatti, NI, et al. Determinants of resident competence in mastoidectomy: role of interest and deliberate practice. Laryngoscope 2013;123:CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Abas, T, Juma, FZ. Benefits of simulation training in medical education. Adv Med Educ Pract 2016;7:399–400CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ioannou, I, Zhou, Y, Wijewickrema, S, Piromchai, P, Copson, B, Kennedy, G, et al. Comparison of experts and residents performing a complex procedure in a temporal bone surgery simulator. Otol Neurotol 2017;38:e85–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiet, GJ, Sørensen, MS, Andersen, SAW. Otologic skills training. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2017;50:CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sudhakara Rao, M, Chandrasekhara Rao, K, Raja Lakshmi, C, Satish Chandra, T, Murthy, PSN. Suitable alternative for human cadaver temporal bone dissection: comparative micro ear anatomy of cattle, pig and sheep with human. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2019;71:CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Irugu, DVK, Singh, AC, Sikka, K, Bhinyaram, J, Sharma, SC. Establishing a temporal bone laboratory in teaching institutes to train future otorhinolaryngologists and fundamentals of temporal bone laboratory: considerations and requirements. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2016;68:CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gawęcki, W, Węgrzyniak, M, Mickiewicz, P, Gawłowska, MB, Talar, M, Wierzbicka, M. The impact of virtual reality training on the quality of real antromastoidectomy performance. J Clin Med 2020;9:3197CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Compton, EC, Agrawal, SK, Ladak, HM, Chan, S, Hoy, M, Nakoneshny, SC, et al. Assessment of a virtual reality temporal bone surgical simulator: a national face and content validity study. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2020;49:17Google ScholarPubMed
Milliren, CE, Evans, CR, Richmond, TK, Dunn, EC. Does an uneven sample size distribution across settings matter in cross-classified multilevel modeling? Results of a simulation study. Health Place 2018;52:CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knowles, M. Andragogy in Action: Applying Modern Principles of Adult Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1984Google Scholar