Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36585662›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2022

Evaluation of antenatal point-of-care ultrasound training workshops for rural/remote healthcare clinicians: a prospective single cohort study.

Amber Bidner, Eva Bezak, Nayana Parange

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Amber BidnerAllied Health and Human Performance, The University of South Australia, Corner of North Terrace and Frome Road, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia. Amber.Bidner@unisa.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7491-517X
Eva BezakAllied Health and Human Performance, The University of South Australia, Corner of North Terrace and Frome Road, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1315-1735
Nayana ParangeAllied Health and Human Performance, The University of South Australia, Corner of North Terrace and Frome Road, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0069-1932

Funding

Hospital Research Foundation 2018/049-83100-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is limited access to life-saving antenatal ultrasound in low-resource rural and remote settings worldwide, including Australia, mainly due to shortages in skilled staff. Point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) offers a viable solution to this service deficit, however, rural clinicians face many barriers accessing training and professional development critical to advancing their clinical practice. Standards for PoCUS training and competency assessment are unclear. Regulation is lacking globally, allowing untrained and inexperienced clinicians to practice PoCUS clinically.

methodsThis prospective single cohort study aimed to evaluate antenatal PoCUS training workshops for General Practitioners (GPs) and Midwives/Nurses (M/Ns) from rural/remote Australia, assessing the impact of the training on trainees' knowledge, confidence and translation of PoCUS into clinical practice. Two-day antenatal ultrasound workshops were delivered at the University of South Australia (UniSA) in 2018 and 2019 to 41 rural/remote clinicians . The training was designed and evaluated using the New world Kirkpatrick Evaluation Framework. Sixteen GPs and 25 M/Ns with mixed prior ultrasound experience were funded to attend. The course consisted of lectures interspaced with hands-on training sessions using high-fidelity simulators and live pregnant models. Pre- and post-knowledge assessments were performed. Post-workshop evaluation and follow-up surveys (3- and 6-month post-training) assessed the workshops and changes to trainees' clinical practice. A 2-day follow-up training session was conducted 12 months after the workshops for 9 trainees.

resultsPre/post knowledge testing demonstrated a 22% mean score improvement (95% CI 17.1 to 27.8, P < 0.0001). At 6 months, 62% of trainees were performing PoCUS that had assisted in patient management and clinical diagnosis, and 46% reported earlier diagnosis and changes to patient management. 74% of trainees had increased scanning frequency and 93% reported improved scanning confidence.

conclusionThis study demonstrated intensive 2-day workshops can equip clinicians with valuable antenatal PoCUS skills, offering a viable solution to assist in the assessment and management of pregnant women in the rural/resource-poor setting where access to ultrasound services is limited or non-existent. Geographical isolation and lack of onsite specialist supervision poses an ongoing challenge to the continuing professional development of remote trainees and the implementation of PoCUS.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CarePoint-of-Care SystemsCohort StudiesFemaleHumansPregnancyProspective StudiesUltrasonographyAntenatalLow-resource settingMedical education/trainingObstetrics and gynaecologyPoint-of-care- ultrasound (PoCUS)RemoteRuralSonographyTrainingUltrasound (US)

Identifiers

PMID36585662
PMCPMC9805197

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.