分析介入放射学培训生的针头和超声探头操作技能随时间和经验的演变。

IF 1.7 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Simulation in Healthcare-Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare Pub Date : 2024-06-27 DOI:10.1097/SIH.0000000000000808
Jeffrey L Weinstein, Hamza Ali, John D Mitchell, Ammar Sarwar, Matthew R Palmer, Christopher MacLellan, Robina Matyal, Muneeb Ahmed
{"title":"分析介入放射学培训生的针头和超声探头操作技能随时间和经验的演变。","authors":"Jeffrey L Weinstein, Hamza Ali, John D Mitchell, Ammar Sarwar, Matthew R Palmer, Christopher MacLellan, Robina Matyal, Muneeb Ahmed","doi":"10.1097/SIH.0000000000000808","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To test the hypothesis that hand motion analysis can measure the progression of needle and ultrasound probe manipulation skills of interventional radiology trainees in central venous line placement.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>An expert cohort of 6 interventional radiologists and 4 anesthesiologists and a trainee cohort of 6 novice trainees (<50 central lines) and 5 experienced trainees (>50 central lines) performed simulated central venous access. Four novices and 1 experienced trainee repeated the task 1 year later. An electromagnetic motion tracking system tracked the needle hand and ultrasound probe. Path length, translational, and rotational movements were calculated separately for the needle hand and probe sensor. These metrics were used to calculate motion metrics based scores on a scale of 0 to 3 for each sensor. Nonparametric statistics were used, and the data are reported as median ± interquartile range.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Comparing novice and experienced trainees, there was a significant difference in probe scores (experienced vs. novice: 1 ± 2 vs. 0 ± 0, P = 0.04) but not in needle-hand scores (1 ± 1.5 vs. 0 ± 1, P = 0.26). Trainees showed a significant increase in probe scores at the 1-year follow-up (baseline vs. follow-up: 0 ± 1 vs. 2.5 ± 1.8, P = 0.003), but no significant difference was observed in the needle manipulation metrics. Experts differed significantly from experienced trainees for all metrics for both sensors (P < 0.05), with the exception of the path length of the probe.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Acquisition of improved dexterity of the probe may occur before improvement in the dexterity with the needle hand for interventional radiology trainees.</p>","PeriodicalId":49517,"journal":{"name":"Simulation in Healthcare-Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analyzing the Evolution of Needle and Ultrasound Probe Manipulation Skills of Interventional Radiology Trainees With Time and Experience.\",\"authors\":\"Jeffrey L Weinstein, Hamza Ali, John D Mitchell, Ammar Sarwar, Matthew R Palmer, Christopher MacLellan, Robina Matyal, Muneeb Ahmed\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/SIH.0000000000000808\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To test the hypothesis that hand motion analysis can measure the progression of needle and ultrasound probe manipulation skills of interventional radiology trainees in central venous line placement.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>An expert cohort of 6 interventional radiologists and 4 anesthesiologists and a trainee cohort of 6 novice trainees (<50 central lines) and 5 experienced trainees (>50 central lines) performed simulated central venous access. Four novices and 1 experienced trainee repeated the task 1 year later. An electromagnetic motion tracking system tracked the needle hand and ultrasound probe. Path length, translational, and rotational movements were calculated separately for the needle hand and probe sensor. These metrics were used to calculate motion metrics based scores on a scale of 0 to 3 for each sensor. Nonparametric statistics were used, and the data are reported as median ± interquartile range.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Comparing novice and experienced trainees, there was a significant difference in probe scores (experienced vs. novice: 1 ± 2 vs. 0 ± 0, P = 0.04) but not in needle-hand scores (1 ± 1.5 vs. 0 ± 1, P = 0.26). Trainees showed a significant increase in probe scores at the 1-year follow-up (baseline vs. follow-up: 0 ± 1 vs. 2.5 ± 1.8, P = 0.003), but no significant difference was observed in the needle manipulation metrics. Experts differed significantly from experienced trainees for all metrics for both sensors (P < 0.05), with the exception of the path length of the probe.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Acquisition of improved dexterity of the probe may occur before improvement in the dexterity with the needle hand for interventional radiology trainees.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49517,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Simulation in Healthcare-Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Simulation in Healthcare-Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000808\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Simulation in Healthcare-Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000808","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:检验手部动作分析能否衡量介入放射学学员在中心静脉置管过程中针头和超声探头操作技能进展的假设:由 6 名介入放射科医师和 4 名麻醉科医师组成的专家小组和由 6 名新手学员组成的学员小组(50 条中心静脉置管)进行了模拟中心静脉置管。4 名新手和 1 名经验丰富的受训人员在 1 年后重复了这项任务。电磁运动跟踪系统跟踪针手和超声探头。分别计算针手和探头传感器的路径长度、平移和旋转运动。这些指标用于计算每个传感器的运动指标得分,评分标准为 0 至 3 分。采用非参数统计,数据以中位数±四分位数范围报告:新手与经验丰富的受训者相比,探针得分有显著差异(经验丰富者与新手:1 ± 2 vs. 0 ± 0,P = 0.04),但针手得分没有显著差异(1 ± 1.5 vs. 0 ± 1,P = 0.26)。在 1 年的随访中,受训者的探针得分有了明显提高(基线与随访:0 ± 1 vs. 2.5 ± 1.8,P = 0.003),但在针刺操作指标方面没有观察到明显差异。专家与经验丰富的学员在两种传感器的所有指标上都存在明显差异(P < 0.05),但探针路径长度除外:结论:对于介入放射学受训者来说,探针灵巧性的提高可能发生在针手灵巧性提高之前。
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
Analyzing the Evolution of Needle and Ultrasound Probe Manipulation Skills of Interventional Radiology Trainees With Time and Experience.

Purpose: To test the hypothesis that hand motion analysis can measure the progression of needle and ultrasound probe manipulation skills of interventional radiology trainees in central venous line placement.

Materials and methods: An expert cohort of 6 interventional radiologists and 4 anesthesiologists and a trainee cohort of 6 novice trainees (<50 central lines) and 5 experienced trainees (>50 central lines) performed simulated central venous access. Four novices and 1 experienced trainee repeated the task 1 year later. An electromagnetic motion tracking system tracked the needle hand and ultrasound probe. Path length, translational, and rotational movements were calculated separately for the needle hand and probe sensor. These metrics were used to calculate motion metrics based scores on a scale of 0 to 3 for each sensor. Nonparametric statistics were used, and the data are reported as median ± interquartile range.

Results: Comparing novice and experienced trainees, there was a significant difference in probe scores (experienced vs. novice: 1 ± 2 vs. 0 ± 0, P = 0.04) but not in needle-hand scores (1 ± 1.5 vs. 0 ± 1, P = 0.26). Trainees showed a significant increase in probe scores at the 1-year follow-up (baseline vs. follow-up: 0 ± 1 vs. 2.5 ± 1.8, P = 0.003), but no significant difference was observed in the needle manipulation metrics. Experts differed significantly from experienced trainees for all metrics for both sensors (P < 0.05), with the exception of the path length of the probe.

Conclusions: Acquisition of improved dexterity of the probe may occur before improvement in the dexterity with the needle hand for interventional radiology trainees.

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
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
8.30%
发文量
158
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Simulation in Healthcare: The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare is a multidisciplinary publication encompassing all areas of applications and research in healthcare simulation technology. The journal is relevant to a broad range of clinical and biomedical specialties, and publishes original basic, clinical, and translational research on these topics and more: Safety and quality-oriented training programs; Development of educational and competency assessment standards; Reports of experience in the use of simulation technology; Virtual reality; Epidemiologic modeling; Molecular, pharmacologic, and disease modeling.
期刊最新文献
Creation of a Novel Child Simulator and Curriculum to Optimize Administration of Seizure Rescue Medication. Increase in Newborns Ventilated Within the First Minute of Life and Reduced Mortality After Clinical Data-Guided Simulation Training. Systematic Review of Procedural Skill Simulation in Health Care in Low- and Middle-Income Countries. Optimal Duration of High-Fidelity Simulator Training for Bronchoscope-Guided Intubation: A Noninferiority Randomized Trial. Theoretical, Conceptual, and Operational Aspects in Simulation Training With Rapid Cycle Deliberate Practice: An Integrative Review.
×
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