Procedural Confidence and Usability of a Novel Lateral Canthotomy and Cantholysis Simulator Compared to a Traditional Porcine Model in Emergency Medicine Training.

Brandon M Carius, Shannon N Thompson, James K Aden, Zachary Sletten, Erin R Hanlin
{"title":"Procedural Confidence and Usability of a Novel Lateral Canthotomy and Cantholysis Simulator Compared to a Traditional Porcine Model in Emergency Medicine Training.","authors":"Brandon M Carius,&nbsp;Shannon N Thompson,&nbsp;James K Aden,&nbsp;Zachary Sletten,&nbsp;Erin R Hanlin","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Retrobulbar hemorrhage (RBH) occurs in only 0.45% of ocular trauma, but failure to provide timely lateral canthotomy and cantholysis (LCC) risks permanent visual deficits. With ocular trauma rates as high as 8.5-10% amongst modern combat injuries, and more than 2,000 severe eye injuries documented over a 10 year span, this concern increases.12-15 However, given infrequent RBH occurrence in the non-combat environment, emergency medicine residents trained in stateside settings may not receive adequate LCC exposure prior to military deployment. Simulators should be evaluated for procedural confidence compared to expensive and cumbersome traditional live tissue training (LTT) options. We seek to compare procedural confidence and usability of emergency medicine military residents performing LCC on a novel simulator to those using LTT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study randomized 32 emergency physician and physician assistant residents to perform LCC on a simulator or LTT model. All received a standardized brief on RBH recognition and LCC, then completed an 11-question survey using a 100-mm visual numerical rating scale about their ability to correctly identify RBH and perform LCC. The survey was repeated after LCC completion. All volunteers additionally completed a 10-question survey utilizing a 5-point Likert scale on the usability of the model to which they were randomized.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No significant difference in reported confidence changes between groups was found; however, significant increases were found across all reported confidence measures between pre- and post-trainer use in the overall sample population. LCC simulator users reported significantly higher usability in 7 of 10 ratings.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The lack of a statistically significant difference between groups in procedural confidence suggests artificial LCC simulators may offer an attractive alternative to logistically-complicated porcine models. Further research is needed to evaluate non-inferiority and procedural performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":74148,"journal":{"name":"Medical journal (Fort Sam Houston, Tex.)","volume":" PB 8-21-04/05/06","pages":"38-43"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical journal (Fort Sam Houston, Tex.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Retrobulbar hemorrhage (RBH) occurs in only 0.45% of ocular trauma, but failure to provide timely lateral canthotomy and cantholysis (LCC) risks permanent visual deficits. With ocular trauma rates as high as 8.5-10% amongst modern combat injuries, and more than 2,000 severe eye injuries documented over a 10 year span, this concern increases.12-15 However, given infrequent RBH occurrence in the non-combat environment, emergency medicine residents trained in stateside settings may not receive adequate LCC exposure prior to military deployment. Simulators should be evaluated for procedural confidence compared to expensive and cumbersome traditional live tissue training (LTT) options. We seek to compare procedural confidence and usability of emergency medicine military residents performing LCC on a novel simulator to those using LTT.

Methods: This study randomized 32 emergency physician and physician assistant residents to perform LCC on a simulator or LTT model. All received a standardized brief on RBH recognition and LCC, then completed an 11-question survey using a 100-mm visual numerical rating scale about their ability to correctly identify RBH and perform LCC. The survey was repeated after LCC completion. All volunteers additionally completed a 10-question survey utilizing a 5-point Likert scale on the usability of the model to which they were randomized.

Results: No significant difference in reported confidence changes between groups was found; however, significant increases were found across all reported confidence measures between pre- and post-trainer use in the overall sample population. LCC simulator users reported significantly higher usability in 7 of 10 ratings.

Conclusion: The lack of a statistically significant difference between groups in procedural confidence suggests artificial LCC simulators may offer an attractive alternative to logistically-complicated porcine models. Further research is needed to evaluate non-inferiority and procedural performance.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
与传统猪模型相比,新型侧眦切开术和侧眦溶解模拟器在急诊医学培训中的程序置信度和可用性。
简介:球后出血(RBH)仅发生在0.45%的眼外伤中,但未能及时提供侧眦切开术和眦松解术(LCC)可能会导致永久性视力缺陷。在现代战斗伤害中,眼部创伤率高达8.5-10%,在10年的时间里记录了2000多起严重的眼部伤害,这一担忧日益增加。12-15然而,鉴于在非战斗环境中很少发生RBH,在美国本土环境中接受过培训的急诊医师在军事部署之前可能没有充分接触过LCC。与昂贵和繁琐的传统活组织训练(LTT)选项相比,应评估模拟器的程序置信度。我们试图比较急诊医学军事居民在新型模拟器上执行LCC与使用LTT的程序信心和可用性。方法:本研究随机抽取32名急诊医师和医师助理住院医师,在模拟器或LTT模型上进行LCC。所有参与者都接受了关于RBH识别和LCC的标准化简要介绍,然后使用100毫米视觉数字评定量表完成了11个问题的调查,以评估他们正确识别RBH和执行LCC的能力。LCC完成后再次进行调查。所有志愿者还完成了一个10个问题的调查,利用5点李克特量表对他们随机分配的模型的可用性进行了调查。结果:两组间报告的置信度变化无显著差异;然而,在整个样本人群中,在培训师使用前后,所有报告的置信度都有显著的增加。LCC模拟器用户在10个评分中有7个评分明显更高。结论:在程序置信度方面,各组之间缺乏统计学上的显著差异,这表明人工LCC模拟器可能为物流复杂的猪模型提供了一个有吸引力的替代方案。对非劣效性和程序性绩效的评价有待进一步研究。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Closing the Trauma and Critical Care Gap: A Paradigm Shift through Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality. MRI Predictive Model's Utility in a Recruit Training Environment for Tibia Stress Fractures. Platelet-Rich Plasma Improves Strength and Speed of Recovery in an Active-Duty Soldier with Isolated Injury to the Lateral Collateral Ligament of the Knee: A Case Report. The Continued Misadventures of Intentional C4 Ingestion: A Case Cluster. Impact of a Novel Biplane User Interface on Ultrasound-Guided Vascular Access Performance: A Prospective, Randomized, Crossover Study.
×
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