Comparisons of two diaphragm ultrasound-teaching programs: a multicenter randomized controlled educational study.
Course
Critical care
Diaphragm imaging
Diaphragm ultrasound
Education
Intensive care unit
Learning
Training
Journal
The ultrasound journal
ISSN: 2524-8987
Titre abrégé: Ultrasound J
Pays: Italy
ID NLM: 101742146
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 Oct 2019
03 Oct 2019
Historique:
received:
20
06
2019
accepted:
31
08
2019
entrez:
4
10
2019
pubmed:
4
10
2019
medline:
4
10
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
This study aims to ascertain whether (1) an educational program is sufficient to achieve adequate Diaphragm Ultrasound (DUS) assessments on healthy volunteers and (2) combining a video tutorial with a practical session is more effective in making learners capable to obtain accurate DUS measurements, as opposed to sole video tutorial. We enrolledstep 1: 172 volunteers naïve to ultrasound. After watching a video tutorial, a questionnaire was administered and considered to be passed when at least 70% of the questions were correctly answered. Course participants who passed the theoretical test were randomized to either intervention or control group. Learners randomized to the interventional group underwent to a practical training, tutored by an expert, before accessing DUS examination. Participants randomized to the control group directly accessed DUS examination, without any practical training. DUS measurements by learners and tutors were recorded and checked for accuracy, according to predefined criteria. Detection of both acoustic windows and accurate DUS assessment was achieved by 83.7% learners of the intervention group while 3.5% only among controls (p < 0.0001). The subcostal view of the diaphragm was correctly identified by 92% and 65% learners in the intervention and control groups, respectively (p < 0.0001) while the apposition zone by 86% and 71% learners, respectively (p = 0.026). An accurate diaphragm displacement (DD) measurement was obtained by 91% and 45% learners in the intervention and control groups, respectively (p < 0.0001) while an accurate thickening fraction (TF) measurement by 99% and 21%, respectively (p < 0.0001). DD measurements by both groups of learners were significantly correlated with those assessed by expert tutors; however, a significant improvement of measurement accuracy was found in learners randomized to receive also the practical training, compared to controls. A combined approach consisting of a theoretical module followed by a practical training is more effective in managing acoustic windows and performing accurate measurements when compared to an exclusively theoretical course. Trial registration prospectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier: NCT03704129; release date 17th October 2018).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
This study aims to ascertain whether (1) an educational program is sufficient to achieve adequate Diaphragm Ultrasound (DUS) assessments on healthy volunteers and (2) combining a video tutorial with a practical session is more effective in making learners capable to obtain accurate DUS measurements, as opposed to sole video tutorial.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We enrolledstep 1: 172 volunteers naïve to ultrasound. After watching a video tutorial, a questionnaire was administered and considered to be passed when at least 70% of the questions were correctly answered. Course participants who passed the theoretical test were randomized to either intervention or control group. Learners randomized to the interventional group underwent to a practical training, tutored by an expert, before accessing DUS examination. Participants randomized to the control group directly accessed DUS examination, without any practical training. DUS measurements by learners and tutors were recorded and checked for accuracy, according to predefined criteria. Detection of both acoustic windows and accurate DUS assessment was achieved by 83.7% learners of the intervention group while 3.5% only among controls (p < 0.0001). The subcostal view of the diaphragm was correctly identified by 92% and 65% learners in the intervention and control groups, respectively (p < 0.0001) while the apposition zone by 86% and 71% learners, respectively (p = 0.026). An accurate diaphragm displacement (DD) measurement was obtained by 91% and 45% learners in the intervention and control groups, respectively (p < 0.0001) while an accurate thickening fraction (TF) measurement by 99% and 21%, respectively (p < 0.0001). DD measurements by both groups of learners were significantly correlated with those assessed by expert tutors; however, a significant improvement of measurement accuracy was found in learners randomized to receive also the practical training, compared to controls.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
A combined approach consisting of a theoretical module followed by a practical training is more effective in managing acoustic windows and performing accurate measurements when compared to an exclusively theoretical course. Trial registration prospectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier: NCT03704129; release date 17th October 2018).
Identifiants
pubmed: 31578700
doi: 10.1186/s13089-019-0137-4
pii: 10.1186/s13089-019-0137-4
pmc: PMC6775177
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03704129']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
21Références
Intensive Care Med. 2015 Apr;41(4):734
pubmed: 25749574
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2015 Nov 1;192(9):1080-8
pubmed: 26167730
Intensive Care Med. 2013 May;39(5):801-10
pubmed: 23344830
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2015;29(3):576-81
pubmed: 25622973
Respir Care. 2019 Oct;64(10):1231-1239
pubmed: 31164484
Biomed Res Int. 2017;2017:8147075
pubmed: 28459070
Chest. 2009 Jun;135(6):1416-1420
pubmed: 19225055
BMC Med Educ. 2012 Oct 29;12:101
pubmed: 23107588
Rev Bras Anestesiol. 2019 Jan - Feb;69(1):20-26
pubmed: 30413278
Crit Ultrasound J. 2015 Jan 21;7:1
pubmed: 25852842
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2018 Feb;43(2):161-165
pubmed: 29315130
Chest. 2009 Feb;135(2):391-400
pubmed: 19017880
Intensive Care Med. 2015 Apr;41(4):642-9
pubmed: 25693448
Crit Care Med. 2019 Jun;47(6):e506-e511
pubmed: 30882477
Intensive Care Med. 2017 Jan;43(1):29-38
pubmed: 27620292
Chest. 2017 Jan;151(1):34-40
pubmed: 27645689
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2019 Sep;33(9):2525-2536
pubmed: 30686657
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2018 Mar 20;:null
pubmed: 29557671
Crit Care Med. 2011 Dec;39(12):2627-30
pubmed: 21705883