ArticleArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2024
Resident Performance on the Fundamentals of Arthroscopic Surgery Training (FAST) Workstation Does Not Predictably Improve With Postgraduate Year.
Article in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Benchmark Development for Fundamental Arthroscopic Skills Using a Simulation-Based Training Program: Observational Study.JMIR perioperative medicine · 2026Observational
- A 3D-Printed Home-Based Arthroscopic Simulator Improves Basic Surgical Skills: A Prospective Comparative Multicentre Study.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2026Article
- The Samsung Medical Center (SMC) Knot: Surgical Technique and Demonstration With Teaching Modification.Arthroscopy techniques · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: To identify differences in performance on the Fundamentals of Arthroscopic Surgery Training (FAST) workstation between residents across different postgraduate years and training sites. Methods: During the 2018-2019 academic year, 102 orthopaedic surgery residents from 4 training sites completed 6 FAST modules. Failure was defined as either completion time exceeding benchmark time or commission of task-specific errors. With the exception of knot tying, each module was completed by participants twice-once with each hand serving as the camera hand. Time to completion (except for knot tying) and errors were recorded for each of the modules. Completion times and failure rates were compared between postgraduate years, seniority groups, and training sites. Results: In all modules for which time was recorded, except for the suture-passage module, there was no significant difference in time to completion based on seniority ( Conclusions: Time to completion and rate of failure did not predictably decrease with level of training. Training site proved to be a significant predictor of performance. Factors such as hand dominance and familiarity with the equipment proved to be important considerations for some modules. Clinical Relevance: Objective assessment of arthroscopic skills among orthopaedic trainees is difficult. Using reproducible methodology to assess trainees on specific skills at all postgraduate years and at multiple training sites may provide important information about orthopaedic training.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.