Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39466493›Full record

ArticleThe ultrasound journal2024

Tele-education in point-of-care ultrasound training.

Reina Suzuki, William J Riley, Matthew S Bushman, Yue Dong, Hiroshi Sekiguchi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The ultrasound journal, 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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  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

5 authors.

Reina SuzukiDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
William J RileyHealthcare Technology Management, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Matthew S BushmanCenter for Digital Health, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Yue DongDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Hiroshi SekiguchiDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. sekiguchi.hiroshi@mayo.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9409-1617

Funding

Mayo Clinic 300-43306
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTraditionally, ultrasound skills have been taught through a one-on-one approach, where instructors physically guide learners' hands at the bedside or in the workshop. However, this method is frequently challenged by scheduling and cost limitations. Our objective was to create a tele-education model for point-of-care ultrasound training and evaluate its effectiveness and its impact on learners' perceived workload compared to conventional education and self-directed learning methods.

methodsWe conducted a 3-arm randomized trial, comparing tele-education (TE), conventional education (CE) and self-directed learning (SL) methods. All subjects underwent online didactic lectures prior to a hands-on ultrasound workshop. The TE group utilized an ultrasound machine equipped with a speakerphone, a webcam for direct visualization of learner's hand maneuvers, and an analog-to-video converter for the real-time streaming of ultrasound images. This configuration enabled remote instructors to provide immediate verbal feedback to learners. In contrast, the CE group received in-person coaching, while the SL group had no instructors present. Following the coaching session, subjects completed a scenario-based skill test and a survey on the National Aeronautics and Space Administration task load index (NASA-TLX) to measure their ultrasound competency and perceived workload, respectively.

resultsTwenty-seven ultrasound novices were randomly allocated into 3 groups. The median skill test score of TE, CE, and SL was 22 [interquartile range (IQR): 18-28], 24 [IQR: 21-31], and 16 [IQR: 15-18], respectively (p < 0.01). Pairwise comparisons of median test scores of 3 groups demonstrated a statistical significance in comparisons of TE vs. SL (22 vs. 16, p = 0.01) and CE vs. SL (24 vs. 16, p < 0.01), but not in TE vs. CE (22 vs. 24, p = 0.56). There was no statistical significance observed in the median NASA-TLX scores among the 3 groups; 54 [IQR:47-61] in TE, 57 [IQR:22-64] in CE, and 66 [IQR: 66-72] in SL (p = 0.05).

conclusionsOur tele-education model was more effective than self-directed learning. There was no statistically significant difference in effectiveness between the tele-education and the conventional education groups. Importantly, tele-education did not impose a significantly higher workload on learners compared to conventional education or self-directed learning. Tele-education has a substantial potential as an alternative to conventional ultrasound training.

Indexed as

Critical carePoint-of-care ultrasonographyRemote coachingTele-educationUltrasound

Identifiers

PMID39466493
PMCPMC11519237

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.