Virtual CMR training proves feasible and effective: Survey data from international participants of the CMR Academy Berlin, Germany

Abstract Aims This study aims to evaluate the success of the cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging Academy Berlin’s transition from in-person to online CMR imaging training during the global pandemic 2020 and to gather recommendations for future courses. Methods and results We conducted an online survey targeting CMR course participants from both the pre-pandemic, in-person era and the pandemic, online era of the CMR Academy Berlin. The survey primarily used Likert-type questions to assess participants’ experiences and preferences. A total of 61 out of 158 invited participants (38.61%) completed the survey, with 31 (50.82%) being in-person alumni and 30 (49.18%) being online alumni. Both in-person [83.87% (26/31)] and online [83.33% (25/30)] participants rated the course as either ‘very good’ or ‘excellent’, and both groups found the course either ‘extremely helpful’ or ‘very helpful’. However, a higher percentage of in-person participants [96.77% (30/31)] felt comfortable asking questions compared to online participants [83.33% (25/30); P = 0.025]. The majority in both groups preferred a written exam [total: 75.41% (46/61); in-person alumni: 77.42% (24/31); online alumni 73.33% (22/30)]. In terms of course format preferences, in-person courses were preferred by both in-person alumni [38.71% (12/31)] and online alumni [60% (18/30)], almost as much as a hybrid format combining in-person and online elements [in-person alumni: 41.94% (13/31), online alumni: 30% (9/30)]. Conclusion The transition from in-person to online CMR training at the CMR Academy Berlin was successful in maintaining overall satisfaction. However, there is room for improvement in terms of increased interaction, particularly for online participants. Future CMR- and potentially also cardiac computer tomography-courses should consider adopting a hybrid format to accommodate participants’ preferences and enhance their learning experience, especially to gain level II competency, whereas level I virtual only might be sufficient.