Comparison of NeedleTrainer™ and ultrasound tissue simulator in a simulated environment among novice regional anaesthesia practitioners.

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH BMC Medical Education Pub Date : 2024-11-22 DOI:10.1186/s12909-024-06361-7
Mohammad Nizam Mokhtar, Siti Aisyah Suhaini, Weng Ken Chan, Iskandar Khalid, Kok Wang Tan, Angelina Chia Chia Lim, Maryam Budiman, Afifah Samsudin, Asmah Azizeh, Vimal Varma Spor Madiman, Azarinah Izaham
{"title":"Comparison of NeedleTrainer™ and ultrasound tissue simulator in a simulated environment among novice regional anaesthesia practitioners.","authors":"Mohammad Nizam Mokhtar, Siti Aisyah Suhaini, Weng Ken Chan, Iskandar Khalid, Kok Wang Tan, Angelina Chia Chia Lim, Maryam Budiman, Afifah Samsudin, Asmah Azizeh, Vimal Varma Spor Madiman, Azarinah Izaham","doi":"10.1186/s12909-024-06361-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Utilising ultrasound technology has resulted in higher success and lower complication rates during regional anaesthesia (RA) procedures. Proper training is necessary to accurately identify structures, optimise images, and improve hand-eye coordination. Simulation training using immersive virtual environments and simulation models has enabled this competency training to be conducted safely before performing on patients. We conducted a study to compare the simulator performance and users' feedback on a Blue Phantom Regional Anaesthesia Ultrasound Training Block and NeedleTrainer™.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty-seven participants were recruited via convenient sampling during a RA workshop for novice practitioners. They were divided into the N or B group and then crossover to experience using both Blue Phantom and NeedleTrainer model. Time-to-reach-target, first-pass success rate, and complication rate were assessed, while the learning and confidence scores were rated using six-item and three-item questionnaires, respectively, via a 5-point Likert scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Blue Phantom model has a longer time-to-target as compared to the NeedleTrainer model (16 ± 8 vs 8 ± 3 s, p < 0.001), higher first- pass success rate (100% vs 80.9%), and lower complication rate (0% vs 19.1%). Higher overall learning satisfaction scores (28 ± 4 vs 25 ± 4, p = 0.003) and confidence scores after training (13 ± 2 vs 12 ± 2, p < 0.001) were recorded for the Blue Phantom model.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We postulated that the artificial intelligence structure recognition software enables NeedleTrainer users to attain shorter time-to-target. That being said, Blue Phantom provides better operator learning satisfaction, improved confidence, higher success and lower complication rates among novice RA practitioners, possibly due to greater tactile feedback during the simulated training.</p>","PeriodicalId":51234,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Education","volume":"24 1","pages":"1350"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11583760/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-06361-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Utilising ultrasound technology has resulted in higher success and lower complication rates during regional anaesthesia (RA) procedures. Proper training is necessary to accurately identify structures, optimise images, and improve hand-eye coordination. Simulation training using immersive virtual environments and simulation models has enabled this competency training to be conducted safely before performing on patients. We conducted a study to compare the simulator performance and users' feedback on a Blue Phantom Regional Anaesthesia Ultrasound Training Block and NeedleTrainer™.

Methods: Forty-seven participants were recruited via convenient sampling during a RA workshop for novice practitioners. They were divided into the N or B group and then crossover to experience using both Blue Phantom and NeedleTrainer model. Time-to-reach-target, first-pass success rate, and complication rate were assessed, while the learning and confidence scores were rated using six-item and three-item questionnaires, respectively, via a 5-point Likert scale.

Results: Blue Phantom model has a longer time-to-target as compared to the NeedleTrainer model (16 ± 8 vs 8 ± 3 s, p < 0.001), higher first- pass success rate (100% vs 80.9%), and lower complication rate (0% vs 19.1%). Higher overall learning satisfaction scores (28 ± 4 vs 25 ± 4, p = 0.003) and confidence scores after training (13 ± 2 vs 12 ± 2, p < 0.001) were recorded for the Blue Phantom model.

Conclusions: We postulated that the artificial intelligence structure recognition software enables NeedleTrainer users to attain shorter time-to-target. That being said, Blue Phantom provides better operator learning satisfaction, improved confidence, higher success and lower complication rates among novice RA practitioners, possibly due to greater tactile feedback during the simulated training.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在模拟环境中对区域麻醉新手进行针培训器™和超声组织模拟器的比较。
背景:利用超声技术可提高区域麻醉(RA)手术的成功率,降低并发症发生率。要准确识别结构、优化图像并提高手眼协调能力,就必须进行适当的培训。使用身临其境的虚拟环境和仿真模型进行的模拟训练使这种能力训练能够在对患者进行操作前安全地进行。我们进行了一项研究,以比较 Blue Phantom 区域麻醉超声训练区块和 NeedleTrainer™ 的模拟器性能和用户反馈:在为新手从业者举办的区域麻醉研讨会上,我们通过方便抽样的方式招募了 47 名参与者。他们被分为 N 组或 B 组,然后交叉体验 Blue Phantom 和 NeedleTrainer 模型。对到达目标的时间、首次成功率和并发症发生率进行了评估,并分别使用六项和三项问卷,通过 5 点李克特量表对学习和信心进行评分:结果:与 NeedleTrainer 模型相比,Blue Phantom 模型的目标时间更长(16±8 秒 vs 8±3 秒,p 结论:Blue Phantom 模型的目标时间比 NeedleTrainer 模型更长(16±8 秒 vs 8±3 秒,p):我们推测,人工智能结构识别软件可使 NeedleTrainer 用户达到更短的目标时间。尽管如此,"蓝色幻影"(Blue Phantom)仍能提高操作者的学习满意度,增强信心,提高成功率,降低新手的并发症发生率,这可能是由于在模拟训练过程中提供了更多的触觉反馈。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Medical Education
BMC Medical Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
795
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Education is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the training of healthcare professionals, including undergraduate, postgraduate, and continuing education. The journal has a special focus on curriculum development, evaluations of performance, assessment of training needs and evidence-based medicine.
期刊最新文献
Medical students' perceptions of a community-engaged learning approach to community health in Ghana: the Students' Community Engagement Programme (SCEP). Medical students' perspectives of reflection for their professional development. Perception of undergraduate medical students and examiners towards grand objective structured clinical examination. Satisfaction and learning experience of students using online learning platforms for medical education. Using the adaptive action method to tackle wicked problems in rural faculty development.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1