ReviewBMC medical education2024
Training, experience, and perceptions of chest tube insertion by higher speciality trainees: implications for training, patient safety, and service delivery.
Review in BMC medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Skill retention of advanced airway techniques after simulation training - a randomized prospective study.BMC medical education · 2026Trial
- Development and Evaluation of a Low-Cost Phantom Model for Ultrasound-Guided Intercostal Chest Drain Insertion.Cureus · 2026Article
- Role of the general medical registrar in performing out-of-hours pleural procedures: a UK national survey of trainee and trainer perspectives.BMJ open respiratory research · 2026Article
- British Thoracic Society Training Standards for Pleural Procedures.BMJ open respiratory research · 2025Article
- Chest Tubes and Pleural Drainage: History and Current Status in Pleural Disease Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
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
backgroundSeldinger Chest Tube Insertion (CTI) is a high acuity low occurrence procedure and remains a core capability for UK physician higher speciality trainee's (HST). A multitude of factors have emerged which may affect the opportunity of generalists to perform CTI. In view of which, this paper sought to establish the current experiences, attitudes, training, and knowledge of medical HST performing Seldinger CTI in acute care hospitals in the Peninsula deanery.
methodsA Scoping review was performed to establish the UK medical HST experience of adult seldinger CTI. Synonymous terms for CTI training were searched across Cochrane, ERIC, Pubmed and British education index databases. Following which, a regional survey was constructed and completed by HST and pleural consultants from five hospitals within the Peninsula deanery between April-July 2022. Data collected included participants demographics, attitudes, training, experience, and clinical knowledge. Outcomes were collated and comparisons made across groups using SPSS. A p-value of < 0.05 was defined as significant.
resultsThe scoping review returned six papers. Salient findings included low self-reported procedural confidence levels, poor interventional selection for patient cases, inadequate site selection for CTI and 1 paper reported only 25% of respondents able to achieve 5-10 CTI annually. However, all papers were limited by including grades other than HST in their responses. The regional survey was completed by 87 HST (12 respiratory, 63 non-respiratory medical HST and 12 intensivists/anaesthetists HST). An additional seven questionnaires were completed by pleural consultants. Respiratory HSTs performed significantly more Seldinger CTI than general and ICM/anaesthetic registrars (p < 0.05). The percentage of HST able to achieve a self-imposed annual CTI number were 81.8, 12.9 and 41.7% respectively. Self-reported transthoracic ultrasound competence was 100, 8 and 58% respectively (p < 0.001). The approach to clinical management significantly differed with national guidance with pleural consultants showing an agreement of 89%, respiratory HST 75%, general HST 52% and ICM/anaesthetic HST 54% (p = 0.002).
conclusionCompared to respiratory trainees, non-respiratory trainees perform lower numbers of Seldinger CTI, with lower confidence levels, limited knowledge, and a reduced perceived relevance of the skill set. This represents a significant training and service challenge, with notable patient safety implications.
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.