ArticleBMC medical education2025
Open-access RUSH protocol course improves knowledge and perceived confidence among healthcare learners.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Rapid Ultrasound in Shock (RUSH) protocol is an effective point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) tool for diagnosing shock, yet access to training is limited by high costs, instructor shortages, and global disruptions like COVID-19. This study evaluates the impact of an open-access RUSH course on enhancing knowledge and perceived confidence among healthcare learners, focusing on those from Low- and lower-middle-income countries (LIC and LMICs) and with varying levels of prior ultrasound experience.
methodsThe online RUSH protocol course offered by the International Emergency Medicine (iEM) Education Project via iem-course.org. Participants completed pre- and post-course surveys that gathered demographic information and assessed their confidence using a 0-to-10 Likert scale. Pre- and post-course quizzes were included to measure knowledge gain. Quantitative and qualitative analyses were done as appropriate.
resultsOf 1,008 participants, 982 completed the pre-course survey; 46.0% reported no formal ultrasound training at their institutions, and 40.2% had never attended an ultrasound course. Participants were from 100 countries, with 67.3% from Asia and 40.5% from LIC and LMICs. Knowledge scores significantly improved from 60.0 (46.7–73.3) to 86.7 (80.0–93.3) (p < 0.001), and perceived confidence also increased (p < 0.001). No differences were found in score improvements between income groups, though those without prior experience showed greater knowledge gains than those with experience (26.7 vs. 20, p = 0.003). Additionally, 20.5% of participants provided feedback, noting high satisfaction and suggesting scenario-based videos, more challenging quizzes, and offline resources to enhance the course.
conclusionOnline education proved to be successful in teaching an advanced ultrasound course by significantly improving knowledge and perceived confidence about the RUSH protocol. The course was attended by a large number of participants globally and was successful for those from LIC and LMICs, and those without prior ultrasound training experience. The online course can be considered as a preparatory phase which saves time for more advanced hands-on practice.
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.