Use of “Bug-in-the-Ear” Technology in Improving Pediatric Residents’ Skills in Diagnosis and Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 PEDIATRICS Academic Pediatrics Pub Date : 2025-01-20 DOI:10.1016/j.acap.2025.102781
Alexa Coon DO , Diane Langkamp MD, MPH , Miraides Brown MS , Beth Wildman PhD
{"title":"Use of “Bug-in-the-Ear” Technology in Improving Pediatric Residents’ Skills in Diagnosis and Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder","authors":"Alexa Coon DO ,&nbsp;Diane Langkamp MD, MPH ,&nbsp;Miraides Brown MS ,&nbsp;Beth Wildman PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.acap.2025.102781","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To improve pediatric residents’ skills in the diagnosis and treatment of children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) by giving real-time feedback utilizing Bug-in-the-Ear technology (BIE).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This prospective, controlled study had two treatment groups and three standardized patient (SP) sessions. Session-1 was baseline. In Session-2, the intervention group (IG) received feedback via BIE and the control group (CG) received traditional feedback. Session-3 (3 months later) assessed maintenance of skills, and neither group used BIE. Sessions were recorded and scored by research assistants trained with a novel scoring system called the Clinical Practice Index (CPI). The CPI is an observational instrument based on current American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) ADHD guidelines and DSM-5 criteria for ADHD and was reviewed by content experts in ADHD. CPI scores were analyzed using Repeated Measures ANOVA.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Twenty-five pediatric residents participated; 13 in the CG and 12 in the IG. Maximum obtainable CPI score was 44 points. The IG showed a significant increase in their CPI score from Session-1 to Session-3 (8.27, <em>P</em> <!-->&lt;<!--> <!-->0.001). The CG’s CPI scores from Session-1 to Session-3 did not change significantly (2.85, <em>P</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.536). The IG and CG CPI scores were significantly different at Session-2 (11.7, <em>P</em> <!-->&lt;<!--> <!-->0.001), but not Session-3 (5.03, <em>P</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.1407).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Immediate feedback via BIE showed significant improvement in the IG’s skills in Session-2 and the IG’s mean difference between Session-1 and Session-3. One exposure of BIE was not sufficient for the IG to maintain their skills, and further research is warranted to determine the number of BIE exposures needed for greater maintenance of skills.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50930,"journal":{"name":"Academic Pediatrics","volume":"25 4","pages":"Article 102781"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876285925000063","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To improve pediatric residents’ skills in the diagnosis and treatment of children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) by giving real-time feedback utilizing Bug-in-the-Ear technology (BIE).

Methods

This prospective, controlled study had two treatment groups and three standardized patient (SP) sessions. Session-1 was baseline. In Session-2, the intervention group (IG) received feedback via BIE and the control group (CG) received traditional feedback. Session-3 (3 months later) assessed maintenance of skills, and neither group used BIE. Sessions were recorded and scored by research assistants trained with a novel scoring system called the Clinical Practice Index (CPI). The CPI is an observational instrument based on current American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) ADHD guidelines and DSM-5 criteria for ADHD and was reviewed by content experts in ADHD. CPI scores were analyzed using Repeated Measures ANOVA.

Results

Twenty-five pediatric residents participated; 13 in the CG and 12 in the IG. Maximum obtainable CPI score was 44 points. The IG showed a significant increase in their CPI score from Session-1 to Session-3 (8.27, P < 0.001). The CG’s CPI scores from Session-1 to Session-3 did not change significantly (2.85, P = 0.536). The IG and CG CPI scores were significantly different at Session-2 (11.7, P < 0.001), but not Session-3 (5.03, P = 0.1407).

Conclusion

Immediate feedback via BIE showed significant improvement in the IG’s skills in Session-2 and the IG’s mean difference between Session-1 and Session-3. One exposure of BIE was not sufficient for the IG to maintain their skills, and further research is warranted to determine the number of BIE exposures needed for greater maintenance of skills.
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
利用“耳塞”技术提高儿科住院医师ADHD诊治技能。
目的:利用耳蜗技术(bug -in- ear technology, BIE)进行实时反馈,提高儿科住院医师对ADHD儿童的诊断和治疗技能。方法:本前瞻性对照研究分为2个治疗组和3个标准化患者(SP)疗程。第1期为基线。在Session-2中,干预组(IG)接受BIE反馈,对照组(CG)接受传统反馈。第三阶段(3个月后)评估技能维持,两组都没有使用BIE。研究助理用一种名为临床实践指数(CPI)的新型评分系统对会议进行记录和评分。CPI是一种基于当前AAP ADHD指南和DSM-5 ADHD标准的观察工具,并由ADHD内容专家进行了审查。CPI得分采用重复测量方差分析。结果:25名儿科住院医师参与;CG组13个,IG组12个。最高可获得的CPI得分为44分。从会话1到会话3,IG的CPI得分显著提高(8.27,p)。结论:通过BIE的即时反馈显示,IG在会话2中的技能显著提高,并且IG在会话1和会话3之间的平均差异显著。一次BIE暴露不足以使IG维持他们的技能,需要进一步的研究来确定更大程度上维持技能所需的BIE暴露次数。
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
Academic Pediatrics
Academic Pediatrics PEDIATRICS-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
12.90%
发文量
300
审稿时长
60 days
期刊介绍: Academic Pediatrics, the official journal of the Academic Pediatric Association, is a peer-reviewed publication whose purpose is to strengthen the research and educational base of academic general pediatrics. The journal provides leadership in pediatric education, research, patient care and advocacy. Content areas include pediatric education, emergency medicine, injury, abuse, behavioral pediatrics, holistic medicine, child health services and health policy,and the environment. The journal provides an active forum for the presentation of pediatric educational research in diverse settings, involving medical students, residents, fellows, and practicing professionals. The journal also emphasizes important research relating to the quality of child health care, health care policy, and the organization of child health services. It also includes systematic reviews of primary care interventions and important methodologic papers to aid research in child health and education.
期刊最新文献
Characteristics of US Rural Hospitals by General Pediatric Care Availability, 2023. The Impact of a CBT Program for Pediatric Patients with Disorders of Gut-Brain Interaction and Co-Occurring Mental Health Diagnoses. Health Care Use for Pediatric Community Health Center Patients During Medicaid Coverage Unwinding. Integrating evidence-based early relational health programs into pediatric primary care: A mixed methods study. Appearance- and Performance-Enhancing Drugs and Substances Use among Adolescents: Physician Reports.
×
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:604180095
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