Trial reportBMC medical education2022
Effective methods to enhance medical students' cardioversion and transcutaneous cardiac pacing skills retention - a prospective controlled study.
Trial report in BMC medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- What Mistakes Can Be Made When Performing the Electrical Cardioversion Procedure?-Analysis of Emergency Medical Team Performance during the Championships in Emergency Medicine.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Efficacy of a Virtual 3D Simulation-Based Digital Training Module for Building Dental Technology Students' Long-Term Competency in Removable Partial Denture Design: Prospective Cohort Study.JMIR serious games · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGuideline-based therapy of cardiac arrhythmias is important for many physicians from the beginning of their training. Practical training of the required skills to treat cardiac arrhythmias is useful for acquiring these skills but does not seem sufficient for skill retention. The aim of this study was to compare different retention methods for skills required to treat cardiac arrhythmias with respect to the performance of these skills in an assessment.
methodsSeventy-one final-year medical students participated in a newly designed workshop to train synchronized cardioversion (SC) and transcutaneous cardiac pacing (TCP) skills in 2020. All participants completed an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE 1) one week after the training. Afterwards, the participants were stratified and randomized into three groups. Nine weeks later, one group received a standard operating procedure (SOP) for the skills, one group participated in a second workshop (SW), and one group received no further intervention (control). Ten weeks after the first training, all groups participated in OSCE 2.
resultsThe average score of all students in OSCE 1 was 15.6 ± 0.8 points with no significant differences between the three groups. Students in the control group reached a significantly (p < 0.001) lower score in OSCE 2 (-2.0 points, CI: [-2.9;-1.1]) than in OSCE 1. Students in the SOP-group achieved on average the same result in OSCE 2 as in OSCE 1 (0 points, CI: [-0.63;+0.63]). Students who completed a second skills training (SW-group) scored not significantly higher in OSCE 2 compared to OSCE 1 (+0.4 points, CI: [-0.29;+1.12]). The OSCE 2 scores in groups SOP and SW were neither significantly different nor statistically equivalent.
conclusionsPartial loss of SC and TCP skills acquired in a workshop can be prevented after 10 weeks by reading an SOP as well as by a second workshop one week before the second assessment. Refreshing practical skills with an SOP could provide an effective and inexpensive method for skills retention compared to repeating a training. Further studies need to show whether this effect also exists for other skills and how frequently an SOP should be re-read for appropriate long-term retention of complex skills.
Indexed as
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.