Trauma simulation training: a randomized controlled trial ­evaluating the effectiveness of the Imperial Femoral Intramedullary Nailing Cognitive Task Analysis (IFINCTA) tool

Figures & data

Figure 1. Snapshot of the IFINCTA tool showing the written information of the CTA on the left and the multimedia video clips and audio recordings on the right for the “approach” phase of the procedure.

Figure 3. CONSORT diagram showing recruitment and follow-up of participants.

Table 1. IFINCTA tool rating parameters and rating analysis

No.	Parameter	Agreed^a
1	The tool was easy to us0065	10/11
2	The tool made the procedure easy to understand	11/11
3	The written, visual and audio modalities being simultaneously present was useful	11/11
4	It would be beneficial to use this tool prior to attending an operating theatre session on femoral intramedullary nailing	11/11
5	You enjoyed using this tool	9/11

a > 3 on Likert scale

Table 2. Comparison of pre-test “Touch Surgery™” assessment scores between intervention and control groups. Values are median scores (interquartile range)

Module	Intervention (IFINCTA)	Control “op tech”	p-value^a
1. Patient positioning and preparation	50 (40–55)	45 (25–55)	0.4
2. Femoral canal preparation	53 (50–59)	56 (38–62)	1
3. Proximal locking	57 (50–60)	50 (50–57)	0.4
4. Distal locking and closure	57 (53–63)	58 (51–63)	0.7

a Mann–Whitney U test for median difference in scores

Figure 4. Box and whisker plot comparing post-test “Touch Surgery^TM’ assessment scores between the IFINCTA and control groups for modules 1–4. Red lines are median values, boxes are interquartile ranges, whiskers are ranges of the data sets, and circles are 2 outliers.

Table 3. Comparison of post-test “Touch Surgery™” assessment scores between intervention and control groups. Values are median scores (interquartile range)

Module	Intervention (IFINCTA)	Control “op tech”	Difference (%)	p-value ^a
1. Patient positioning and preparation	80 (75–82)	60 (45–72)	20	< 0.001
2. Femoral canal preparation	79 (67–84)	58 (48–67)	21	0.001
3. Proximal locking	77 (70–82)	67 (52–72)	10	< 0.001
4. Distal locking and closure	82 (81–86)	63 (53–78)	19	< 0.001

^aMann–Whitney U test for median difference in scores

Table 4. Comparison between pre-test and post-test scores for the intervention and the control groups. Values are difference between pre-test and post-test median scores

Module	Intervention (IFINCTA)	p-value^a	Control “op tech”	p-value^a
1. Patient positioning and preparation	30	< 0.001	15	< 0.001
2. Femoral canal preparation	26	< 0.001	2	0.4
3. Proximal locking	20	< 0.001	17	0.04
4. Distal locking and closure	25	< 0.001	5	0.04

a Wilcoxon signed rank test