Face, content, and construct validation of the Bristol TURP trainer.

INTRODUCTION Validation studies are an important part of simulator evaluation and are considered necessary to establish the effectiveness of simulation-based training. The widely used Bristol transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) simulator has not been formally validated. OBJECTIVES Evaluation of the face, content, and construct validities of the Bristol TURP simulator as an endourology training tool. DESIGN Using established validation methodology, face, content, and construct validities were evaluated. Face and content validities were assessed using a structured quantitative survey. Construct validity was assessed by comparing the performance of experts and novices using a validated performance scale and resection efficiency. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING Overall, 8 novice urologists and 8 expert urologists participated in the study. The study was conducted in a dedicated surgical simulation training facility. RESULTS All 16 participants felt the model was a good training tool and should be used as an essential part of urology training (face validity). Content validity evaluation showed that most aspects of the simulator were adequately realistic (mean Likert scores 3.38-3.57/5); however, the model does not simulate bleeding. Experts significantly outperformed novices (p < 0.001) across all measures of performance, therefore establishing construct validity. CONCLUSIONS The Bristol TURP simulator shows face, content, and construct validities, although some aspects of the simulator were not very realistic (e.g., bleeding). This study provides evidence for the continuing use of this simulator in endourology training.