Assessment of surgical skills on a novel expert-informed immersive virtual reality simulator for distal radius fracture fixation: a cross-sectional validation study

Competency-based medical education requires structured training and valid methods for assessing technical proficiency. Virtual reality simulators offer objective, reproducible assessments but often rely on developer-defined metrics lacking transparency and robust validity evidence. This study aimed to collect validity evidence, guided by Messick’s unified validity framework, for a novel, expert-informed, immersive virtual reality simulator designed to assess proficiency among orthopedic physicians for volar plate fixation of distal radius fractures. Twelve orthopedic residents (novices) and eleven experienced orthopedic surgeons completed one distal radius fracture fixation in the simulator. Performance was evaluated using 32 simulator metrics addressing technical proficiency, imaging accuracy, and procedural errors. Simulator metrics were compared between the two groups individually (secondary outcomes) and combined into a composite total simulator score (primary outcome). Validity evidence was structured according to Messick’s framework. The composite score’s discriminatory ability was assessed using the Contrasting Groups’ Method. Experienced surgeons significantly outperformed novices on nine of 32 simulator metrics, while the novices scored higher on one. After excluding this construct-irrelevant metric, the remaining 31 metrics demonstrated acceptable reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.79). The total simulator score was significantly different for the two groups: novices scored − 1.6 points (CI -12.3 to 9.2), and experienced surgeons scored 61.9 points (CI 53.6 to 70.3), p < .001. A discriminatory standard for the total simulator score of 34.0 points completely discriminated between novices and experienced surgeons. This study provides comprehensive validity evidence – covering all five sources in Messick’s framework – for a newly developed, expert-informed, immersive virtual reality simulator for distal radius fracture fixation. The simulator-based assessment reliably discriminated between novices and experienced orthopedic surgeons. These findings support the simulator’s utility for objective skills assessment in distal radius fracture fixation within orthopedic residency training.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Medical Education
Published
2026-03-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-08983-5
Primary Topic
Surgical Simulation and Training
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Assessment of surgical skills on a novel expert-informed immersive virtual reality simulator for distal radius fracture fixation: a cross-sectional validation study

Leizl Joy Nayahangan, Amandus Gustafsson, Monica Ghidinelli, Kristoffer Borbjerg Hare et al.
BMC Medical Education
Surgical Simulation and Training
article

Assessment of surgical skills on a novel expert-informed immersive virtual reality simulator for distal radius fracture fixation: a cross-sectional validation study

Leizl Joy Nayahangan, Amandus Gustafsson, Monica Ghidinelli, Kristoffer Borbjerg Hare, Chitra Subramaniam, Mads Emil Jacobsen, Lars Konge
article en

Abstract

Competency-based medical education requires structured training and valid methods for assessing technical proficiency. Virtual reality simulators offer objective, reproducible assessments but often rely on developer-defined metrics lacking transparency and robust validity evidence. This study aimed to collect validity evidence, guided by Messick’s unified validity framework, for a novel, expert-informed, immersive virtual reality simulator designed to assess proficiency among orthopedic physicians for volar plate fixation of distal radius fractures. Twelve orthopedic residents (novices) and eleven experienced orthopedic surgeons completed one distal radius fracture fixation in the simulator. Performance was evaluated using 32 simulator metrics addressing technical proficiency, imaging accuracy, and procedural errors. Simulator metrics were compared between the two groups individually (secondary outcomes) and combined into a composite total simulator score (primary outcome). Validity evidence was structured according to Messick’s framework. The composite score’s discriminatory ability was assessed using the Contrasting Groups’ Method. Experienced surgeons significantly outperformed novices on nine of 32 simulator metrics, while the novices scored higher on one. After excluding this construct-irrelevant metric, the remaining 31 metrics demonstrated acceptable reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.79). The total simulator score was significantly different for the two groups: novices scored − 1.6 points (CI -12.3 to 9.2), and experienced surgeons scored 61.9 points (CI 53.6 to 70.3), p < .001. A discriminatory standard for the total simulator score of 34.0 points completely discriminated between novices and experienced surgeons. This study provides comprehensive validity evidence – covering all five sources in Messick’s framework – for a newly developed, expert-informed, immersive virtual reality simulator for distal radius fracture fixation. The simulator-based assessment reliably discriminated between novices and experienced orthopedic surgeons. These findings support the simulator’s utility for objective skills assessment in distal radius fracture fixation within orthopedic residency training.

BMC Medical Education
University of Copenhagen (DK), University of Southern Denmark (DK), AO Foundation (CH), Odense University Hospital (DK), AO North America (US), Copenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation (DK), Slagelse Hospital (DK), Region of Southern Denmark (DK), Ringsted Sygehus (DK)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 23%
Surgical Simulation and Training
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.