Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40407939›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical systems2025

Hand Motion Analysis of Different Segments of a Procedure: Is One Segment Enough?

Jeffrey Weinstein, Hamza Ali, Oussama Metrouh, Ammar Sarwar, John D Mitchell, Vincent Baribeau, Vanessa T Wong, Robina Matyal, Matthew R Palmer, Christopher MacLellan and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical systems, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors.

Jeffrey WeinsteinDepartment of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center/Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. jlweinst@bidmc.harvard.edu.
Hamza AliDepartment of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center/Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Oussama MetrouhDepartment of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center/Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Ammar SarwarDepartment of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center/Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
John D MitchellDepartment of Anesthesiology, Henry Ford Health, MI/Michigan State University CHM, Grand Rapids, Detroit, MI, USA.
Vincent BaribeauGeisel School of Medicine, Hanover, NH, USA.
Vanessa T WongDepartment of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center/Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Robina MatyalDepartment of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center/Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Matthew R PalmerDepartment of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center/Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Christopher MacLellanDepartment of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center/Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Muneeb AhmedDepartment of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center/Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aims to examine if the hand motions of operators associated with certain parts of central venous access are more important than others in distinguishing between experts and non-experts. MATERIALS AND

methodsExperts (n = 10) and Trainees (PGY2; n = 18) performed central venous access on a phantom 4 times each as their needle hand and ultrasound probe motions were tracked. Path length-time graphs were used to divide the procedure into three phases: (1) the access phase: visualizing the internal jugular vein on ultrasound and needle placement; (2) the wire phase: passing a wire through the needle; and (3) the confirmation phase: confirming the intravascular wire position and threading a dilator on the wire. Comparisons between trainees and experts were made for the complete trial, and each phase using Mann-Whitney U tests with Benjamini-Hochberg correction. Receiver Operating Characteristic analysis was performed to compare the performance of each phase in differentiating between experts and trainees.

resultsMotion data from 10 experts and 18 trainees was analyzed. Experts and trainees differed significantly for all the motion metrics (p < 0.001). A comparison of the phases showed that the access phase (AUC = 0.96; R2 = 0.79) and the wire phase (AUC = 0.95; R2 = 0.59) were able to distinguish between experts and trainees with an accuracy comparable to the complete trial (AUC = 0.94; R2 = 0.69).

conclusionsThe access phase of simulated central venous access can best differentiate between experts and trainees. This sample of hand motion performance may be able to simplify motion analysis of technical performance and obviate the need for recording hand motion for the entire procedure.

Indexed as

Catheterization, Central VenousClinical CompetenceHandHumansMovementPhantoms, ImagingROC CurveHand motion analysisProcedure segmentationSimulationTechnical performance

Identifiers

PMID40407939

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.