Background: Endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) is a technically challenging procedure, associated with a significant risk of complications. Virtual reality simulation has demonstrated benefit in many disciplines as an important educational tool for surgical training. Within the field of rhinology, there is a lack of ESS simulators with appropriate validity evidence supporting their integration into residency education. The objectives of this study are to evaluate the acceptability, perceived realism and benefit of the McGill Simulator for Endoscopic Sinus Surgery (MSESS) among medical students, otolaryngology residents and faculty, and to present evidence supporting its ability to differentiate users based on their level of training through the performance metrics. Methods: 10 medical students, 10 junior residents, 10 senior residents and 3 expert sinus surgeons performed anterior ethmoidectomies, posterior ethmoidectomies and wide sphenoidotomies on the MSESS. Performance metrics related to quality (e.g. percentage of tissue removed), efficiency (e.g. time, path length, bimanual dexterity, etc.) and safety (e.g. contact with no-go zones, maximum applied force, etc.) were calculated. All users completed a post-simulation questionnaire related to realism, usefulness and perceived benefits of training on the MSESS. Results: The MSESS was found to be realistic and useful for training surgical skills with scores of 7.97 ± 0.29 and 8.57 ± 0.69, respectively on a 10-point rating scale. Most students and residents (29/30) believed that it should be incorporated into their curriculum. There were significant differences between novice surgeons (10 medical students and 10 junior residents) and senior surgeons (10 senior residents and 3 sinus surgeons) in performance metrics related to quality ( p < 0.05), efficiency ( p < 0.01) and safety ( p < 0.05). Conclusion: The MSESS demonstrated initial evidence supporting its use for residency education. This simulator may be a potential resource to help fill the void in endoscopic sinus surgery training.

Background: A longitudinal curriculum was developed in conjunction with anesthesiologists, otolaryngologists, emergency physicians and experts in medical simulation and education. Methods: Residents participated in four different simulation-based training modules using animal models, cadavers, task trainers, and crisis scenarios using high fidelity manikins. Scenarios were based on various clinical settings (i.e. emergency room, operating room) and were followed by video-assisted structured debriefings. Participants completed both a self-assessment questionnaire and an exit survey using five-point Likert scales. Results: 31 otolaryngology residents participated in the curriculum. Residents reported simulation training significantly improved technical skills such as tracheostomy, cricothyroidotomy and pediatric intubation ( p < 0.05 for all). Non-technical skills, including communication, delegation and management were significantly improved on post-test surveys in simulated crisis scenarios ( p < 0.05 for all). 90 (28/31) of participants found simulations to be very realistic. Junior residents placed increased value on didactic teaching and procedural skills, while senior residents on crisis scenarios. Survey results indicated that > 90% (28/31) of participants found the modules of the curriculum to be useful and would recommend them to others. Conclusion: A longitudinal simulation-based medical curriculum can be an effective method to teach airway management and teamwork skills to otolaryngology residents.

Background: Randomized controlled trials are the gold standard in medical and surgical research to assess the efficacy of therapeutic interventions. The reporting of these trials should be of high quality to allow readers’ appropriate interpretation and application. Methods: The objectives of our study were to assess the extent to which the recent Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery (ORL-HNS) randomized control trials in the top nine journals and in the top Canadian journal comply with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement, and to identify the CONSORT items most in need of improvement. Based on the impact factor and circulation number of 2014, the top nine Otolaryngology journals and the top Canadian Otolaryngology journal were selected and were searched to identify RCTs published in English and between 2010 and 2014. Two authors independently reviewed and extracted data using a standardized data extraction form constructed with the help of a medical librarian. Our outcome was to assess the adherence of articles reporting to the CONSORT items. Descriptive statistics were used. Results: One hundred and eighty-two Otolaryngologic RCTs were identified in the top nine international journals and in the top Canadian journal. The inter-rater reliability between two raters was 0.32. The extent of adherence to CONSORT Statement ranged from 25 to 93.5% with a mean of 59.0% and a median of 59.4%. Only 6.5% of RCTs described the individual responsible for enrolling and assigning subjects and method of randomization; 32.4% reported the estimated effect size and precision; 40.6% reported a sample size calculation and 32.4% mentioned external validity or implications of the findings. Conclusion: Findings revealed that the reporting of RCTs in the top nine ORL-HNS journals and in the top Canadian ORL-HNS journal is suboptimal. The quality of reporting can be improved by addressing the three CONSORT items found most deficient in this study namely, sample size calculations, estimated effect size and precision, and external validity.