Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38566149›Full record

Observational studyBMC medical education2024

Teaching Medical Students Rapid Ultrasound for shock and hypotension (RUSH): learning outcomes and clinical performance in a proof-of-concept study.

Lukas Martin Müller-Wirtz, William M Patterson, Sascha Ott, Annika Brauchle, Andreas Meiser, Thomas Volk, Ulrich Berwanger, David Conrad

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study 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 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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. Trial
  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

8 authors.

Lukas Martin Müller-Wirtz *Saarland University, Anaesthesiology, 66424, Homburg, Saarland, Germany. muellel2@ccf.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7984-1798
William M Patterson *Outcomes Research Consortium, Department of Anesthesiology, Cleveland Clinic, 44195, Cleveland, OH, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1922-5555
Sascha OttOutcomes Research Consortium, Department of Anesthesiology, Cleveland Clinic, 44195, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Annika BrauchleSaarland University, Anaesthesiology, 66424, Homburg, Saarland, Germany.
Andreas MeiserSaarland University, Anaesthesiology, 66424, Homburg, Saarland, Germany.
Thomas VolkSaarland University, Anaesthesiology, 66424, Homburg, Saarland, Germany.
Ulrich BerwangerSaarland University, Anaesthesiology, 66424, Homburg, Saarland, Germany.
David ConradSaarland University, Anaesthesiology, 66424, Homburg, Saarland, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPoint-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is a critical diagnostic tool in various medical settings, yet its instruction in medical education is inconsistent. The Rapid Ultrasound for Shock and Hypotension (RUSH) protocol is a comprehensive diagnostic tool, but its complexity poses challenges for teaching and learning. This study evaluates the effectiveness of a single-day training in RUSH for medical students by assessing their performance in clinical scenarios.

methodsIn this prospective single-center observational proof-of-concept study, 16 medical students from Saarland University Medical Center underwent a single-day training in RUSH, followed by evaluations in clinical settings and on a high-fidelity simulator. Performance was assessed using a standardized scoring tool and time to complete the RUSH exam. Knowledge gain was measured with pre- and post-training written exams, and diagnostic performance was evaluated with an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE).

resultsStudents demonstrated high performance in RUSH exam views across patients (median performance: 85-87%) and improved scanning times, although not statistically significant. They performed better on simulators than on live patients. Written exam scores significantly improved post-training, suggesting a gain in theoretical knowledge. However, more than a third of students could not complete the RUSH exam within five minutes on live patients.

conclusionsSingle-day RUSH training improved medical students' theoretical knowledge and simulator performance but translating these skills to clinical settings proved challenging. The findings suggest that while short-term training can be beneficial, it may not suffice for clinical proficiency. This study underscores the need for structured and possibly longitudinal training programs to ensure skill retention and clinical applicability.

Indexed as

HypotensionStudents, MedicalClinical CompetenceHumansLearningProspective StudiesCritical careEmergency medicineMedical educationPOCUSRUSHUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID38566149
PMCPMC10988853

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.