ArticleHeliyon2023
Effects of standardized language on remote ultrasound-guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy training: A mixed-methods explorative pilot study.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Remote teaching of procedural skills has demonstrated equivalence in knowledge acquisition compared to in-person teaching. Variations in terminology for probe and needle movements may serve as a barrier in remote training of ultrasound (US)-guided renal access for percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). This pilot study investigated the utility of standardized terminology in remote training of US-guided renal access for PCNL. Hypothesis: Standardization of verbal terminology to describe US probe and needle movement instruction improves remote teaching of US-guided renal access. Methods: Fifteen urology residents (PGY1-6) were stratified by year and randomized into two groups. We provided participants with images illustrating US probe and needle movements labeled with predetermined standardized terminology for the intervention group and images without labels for the control group. Both groups were asked to perform US-guided renal access on a training mannequin with a remote faculty educator with (intervention) or without (control) use of standardized movement instructions. Quantitative outcomes included number of attempts and time to achieve access. All trainees completed pre- and post-session surveys and participated in focus groups; authors conducted thematic analysis of focus group transcripts. Results: Differences in primary outcomes between groups, including number of attempts and time to achieve access of the renal pole, were not statistically significant. Analysis of focus group interviews revealed that the use of standardized terminology in the setting of remote training can reduce trainee confusion by clarifying ambiguity in educator feedback. Discussion: Use of standardized terminology during remote surgical skills training allows for more effective feedback to trainees.
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.