Evaluation of simulation models in neurosurgical training according to face, content, and construct validity: a systematic review

Neurosurgical training has been traditionally based on an apprenticeship model. However, restrictions on clinical exposure reduce trainees' operative experience. Simulation models may allow for a more efficient, feasible, and time-effective acquisition of skills. Our objectives were to use face, content, and construct validity to review the use of simulation models in neurosurgical education.PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were queried for eligible studies. After excluding duplicates, 1204 studies were screened. Eighteen studies were included in the final review.Neurosurgical skills assessed included aneurysm clipping (n = 6), craniotomy and burr hole drilling (n = 2), tumour resection (n = 4), and vessel suturing (n = 3). All studies assessed face validity, 11 assessed content, and 6 assessed construct validity. Animal models (n = 5), synthetic models (n = 7), and VR models (n = 6) were assessed. In face validation, all studies rated visual realism favourably, but haptic realism was key limitation. The synthetic models ranked a high median tactile realism (4 out of 5) compared to other models. Assessment of content validity showed positive findings for anatomical and procedural education, but the models provided more benefit to the novice than the experienced group. The cadaver models were perceived to be the most anatomically realistic by study participants. Construct validity showed a statistically significant proficiency increase among the junior group compared to the senior group across all modalities.Our review highlights evidence on the feasibility of implementing simulation models in neurosurgical training. Studies should include predictive validity to assess future skill on an individual on whom the same procedure will be administered. This study shows that future neurosurgical training systems call for surgical simulation and objectively validated models.