肺与重症医学科研究员和教员的重症超声能力:全国调查。

POCUS journal Pub Date : 2023-11-27 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.24908/pocus.v8i2.16640
Mark H Adelman, Himanshu Deshwal, Deepak Pradhan
{"title":"肺与重症医学科研究员和教员的重症超声能力:全国调查。","authors":"Mark H Adelman, Himanshu Deshwal, Deepak Pradhan","doi":"10.24908/pocus.v8i2.16640","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> Competency assessment standards for Critical Care Ultrasonography (CCUS) for Graduate Medical Education (GME) trainees in pulmonary/critical care medicine (PCCM) fellowship programs are lacking. We sought to answer the following research questions: How are PCCM fellows and teaching faculty assessed for CCUS competency? Which CCUS teaching methods are perceived as most effective by program directors (PDs) and fellows. <b>Methods:</b> Cross-sectional, nationwide, electronic survey of PCCM PDs and fellows in accredited GME training programs. <b>Results:</b> PDs and fellows both reported the highest rates of fellow competence to use CCUS for invasive procedural guidance, but lower rates for assessment of deep vein thrombosis and abdominal organs. 54% and 90% of PDs reported never assessing fellows or teaching faculty for CCUS competency, respectively. PDs and fellows perceived hands-on workshops and directly supervised CCUS exams as more effective learning methods than unsupervised CCUS archival with subsequent review and self-directed learning. <b>Conclusions:</b> There is substantial variation in CCUS competency assessment among PCCM fellows and teaching faculty nationwide. The majority of training programs do not formally assess fellows or teaching faculty for CCUS competence. Guidelines are needed to formulate standardized competency assessment tools for PCCM fellowship programs.</p>","PeriodicalId":74470,"journal":{"name":"POCUS journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10721306/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Critical Care Ultrasound Competency of Fellows and Faculty in Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine: A Nationwide Survey.\",\"authors\":\"Mark H Adelman, Himanshu Deshwal, Deepak Pradhan\",\"doi\":\"10.24908/pocus.v8i2.16640\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> Competency assessment standards for Critical Care Ultrasonography (CCUS) for Graduate Medical Education (GME) trainees in pulmonary/critical care medicine (PCCM) fellowship programs are lacking. We sought to answer the following research questions: How are PCCM fellows and teaching faculty assessed for CCUS competency? Which CCUS teaching methods are perceived as most effective by program directors (PDs) and fellows. <b>Methods:</b> Cross-sectional, nationwide, electronic survey of PCCM PDs and fellows in accredited GME training programs. <b>Results:</b> PDs and fellows both reported the highest rates of fellow competence to use CCUS for invasive procedural guidance, but lower rates for assessment of deep vein thrombosis and abdominal organs. 54% and 90% of PDs reported never assessing fellows or teaching faculty for CCUS competency, respectively. PDs and fellows perceived hands-on workshops and directly supervised CCUS exams as more effective learning methods than unsupervised CCUS archival with subsequent review and self-directed learning. <b>Conclusions:</b> There is substantial variation in CCUS competency assessment among PCCM fellows and teaching faculty nationwide. The majority of training programs do not formally assess fellows or teaching faculty for CCUS competence. Guidelines are needed to formulate standardized competency assessment tools for PCCM fellowship programs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74470,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"POCUS journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10721306/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"POCUS journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24908/pocus.v8i2.16640\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"POCUS journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24908/pocus.v8i2.16640","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:目前尚缺乏针对肺部/危重症医学(PCCM)研究金项目医学研究生教育(GME)学员的危重症超声检查(CCUS)能力评估标准。我们试图回答以下研究问题:如何评估 PCCM 学员和教师的 CCUS 能力?项目主任 (PD) 和研究员认为哪些 CCUS 教学方法最有效?方法:对经认可的 GME 培训项目中的 PCCM 项目主任和研究员进行横断面、全国性的电子调查。结果:PDs和研究员均报告称,研究员使用CCUS进行侵入性手术指导的胜任率最高,但评估深静脉血栓和腹部器官的胜任率较低。分别有54%和90%的专业医师表示从未对研究员或教学人员进行过CCUS能力评估。与无监督的CCUS存档、后续复习和自学相比,PD和研究员认为实践研讨会和直接监督的CCUS考试是更有效的学习方法。结论:全国 PCCM 学员和教师在 CCUS 能力评估方面存在很大差异。大多数培训项目并未对研究员或教师的 CCUS 能力进行正式评估。需要为 PCCM 研究员项目制定标准化的能力评估工具指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Critical Care Ultrasound Competency of Fellows and Faculty in Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine: A Nationwide Survey.

Purpose: Competency assessment standards for Critical Care Ultrasonography (CCUS) for Graduate Medical Education (GME) trainees in pulmonary/critical care medicine (PCCM) fellowship programs are lacking. We sought to answer the following research questions: How are PCCM fellows and teaching faculty assessed for CCUS competency? Which CCUS teaching methods are perceived as most effective by program directors (PDs) and fellows. Methods: Cross-sectional, nationwide, electronic survey of PCCM PDs and fellows in accredited GME training programs. Results: PDs and fellows both reported the highest rates of fellow competence to use CCUS for invasive procedural guidance, but lower rates for assessment of deep vein thrombosis and abdominal organs. 54% and 90% of PDs reported never assessing fellows or teaching faculty for CCUS competency, respectively. PDs and fellows perceived hands-on workshops and directly supervised CCUS exams as more effective learning methods than unsupervised CCUS archival with subsequent review and self-directed learning. Conclusions: There is substantial variation in CCUS competency assessment among PCCM fellows and teaching faculty nationwide. The majority of training programs do not formally assess fellows or teaching faculty for CCUS competence. Guidelines are needed to formulate standardized competency assessment tools for PCCM fellowship programs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Application of Point of Care Ultrasound to Screen for Pulmonary Hypertension: A Narrative Review VExUS to Guide Ultrafiltration in Hemodialysis: Exploring a Novel Dimension of Point of Care Ultrasound Best Practices for Point of Care Ultrasound: An Interdisciplinary Expert Consensus Return of the Living Dead Gut – A Case Report of Ischemic Colitis Identified on Point of Care Ultrasound Emergency Physician Performed Ultrasound-Guided Abdominal Paracentesis: A Retrospective Analysis
×
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