Haptic, Physical, and Web-Based Simulators: Are They Underused in Maxillofacial Surgery Training?

PURPOSE: Surgical residencies have increasingly incorporated both digital and mannequin simulation into their training programs. The aim of our review was to identify all digital and mannequin maxillofacial simulators available for education and training, highlight their benefit, and critically assess the evidence in support of these educational resources.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature review of all peer-reviewed publications of digital and mannequin simulators that met the inclusion criteria, defined as any simulator used in education or training. All simulators used in surgical planning were excluded. Before the query, it was hypothesized that most studies would be descriptive in nature and supported by low levels of evidence. Literature search strategies included the use of multiple combinations of key search terms, review of titles and abstracts, and precise identification of the use of the simulator described. All statistics were descriptive.

RESULTS: The primary search yielded 259 results, from which 22 total simulators published on from 2001 to 2016 were identified using the inclusion and exclusion criteria: 10 virtual reality haptic-based simulators, 6 physical model simulators, and 6 Web-based simulators used for a variety of procedures such as dental skills, instrument handling, orthognathic surgery (Le Fort I osteotomy, vertical ramus osteotomy, bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy), genioplasty, bone grafting, sinus surgery, cleft lip repair, orbital floor repair, and oral biopsy. Only 9 formalized studies were completed; these were classified as low-level evidence-based cohort studies (Levels IV and V). All other simulator reports were descriptive in nature. There were no studies with high levels of evidence completed (Level I to III).

CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review suggest that, although seemingly beneficial to the trainee in maxillofacial surgery, simulation in education in this field is an underused commodity because of the significant lack of scientific and validated study designs reported on in the literature thus far. The maxillofacial and simulation communities would benefit from studies on utility and efficacy with higher levels of evidence.