{"title":"加拿大医生在痉挛治疗中使用超声波的情况:全国横断面调查","authors":"Fraser MacRae BSc , Ève Boissonnault MD , Alto Lo MD , Heather Finlayson MD , Paul Winston MD , Omar Khan MD , Heather Dow , Farris Kassam BSc , Rajiv Reebye MD","doi":"10.1016/j.arrct.2024.100353","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To identify potential barriers and obstacles preventing clinicians from adopting ultrasound for spasticity management.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>A prospective, cross-sectional national survey.</p></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><p>Web-based platform.</p></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><p>Thirty-six physicians and surgeons from across Canada.</p></div><div><h3>Interventions</h3><p>Survey completion.</p></div><div><h3>Main Outcome Measures</h3><p>The use of ultrasound in clinical spasticity practice, perceived barriers, and risks associated with its implementation.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In total, 36 Canadian physicians and surgeons responded. A total of 91% reported using the US in their practice. Nearly all of them used ultrasonography (US) to guide injections and reported using more than 1 guidance technique for their injections. Less than half of the survey respondents reported using the US for muscle architecture assessment or longitudinal evaluation of muscle echo intensity. A total of 47% of survey respondents reported that they believe there are disadvantages associated with US use in spasticity practice. Disadvantages included increased time requirements resulting in discomfort for the injector and patient, the risk of infection after the procedure, and the risk of needle-stick injury. The most important barrier identified was the increased time demands of US compared with other guidance techniques. Other barriers included a lack of feedback on identifying a spastic muscle compared with electrical guidance techniques, a lack of additional remuneration to complete injections under ultrasound guidance, and a lack of adequate training.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Future educational efforts should address clinicians’ lack of familiarity with US purposes outside of injection guidance. This survey has highlighted the need for a curriculum shift in spasticity education to improve physician's scanning and injection technique, to address concerns about increased time requirements for injecting under ultrasound guidance and to address perceived disadvantages from clinicians.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72291,"journal":{"name":"Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation","volume":"6 3","pages":"Article 100353"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S259010952400051X/pdfft?md5=92e6d530463b08b02a4447f8f5f09421&pid=1-s2.0-S259010952400051X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Canadian Physicians’ Use of Ultrasound in Spasticity Treatment: A National Cross-Sectional Survey\",\"authors\":\"Fraser MacRae BSc , Ève Boissonnault MD , Alto Lo MD , Heather Finlayson MD , Paul Winston MD , Omar Khan MD , Heather Dow , Farris Kassam BSc , Rajiv Reebye MD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.arrct.2024.100353\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To identify potential barriers and obstacles preventing clinicians from adopting ultrasound for spasticity management.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>A prospective, cross-sectional national survey.</p></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><p>Web-based platform.</p></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><p>Thirty-six physicians and surgeons from across Canada.</p></div><div><h3>Interventions</h3><p>Survey completion.</p></div><div><h3>Main Outcome Measures</h3><p>The use of ultrasound in clinical spasticity practice, perceived barriers, and risks associated with its implementation.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In total, 36 Canadian physicians and surgeons responded. A total of 91% reported using the US in their practice. Nearly all of them used ultrasonography (US) to guide injections and reported using more than 1 guidance technique for their injections. Less than half of the survey respondents reported using the US for muscle architecture assessment or longitudinal evaluation of muscle echo intensity. A total of 47% of survey respondents reported that they believe there are disadvantages associated with US use in spasticity practice. Disadvantages included increased time requirements resulting in discomfort for the injector and patient, the risk of infection after the procedure, and the risk of needle-stick injury. The most important barrier identified was the increased time demands of US compared with other guidance techniques. Other barriers included a lack of feedback on identifying a spastic muscle compared with electrical guidance techniques, a lack of additional remuneration to complete injections under ultrasound guidance, and a lack of adequate training.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Future educational efforts should address clinicians’ lack of familiarity with US purposes outside of injection guidance. This survey has highlighted the need for a curriculum shift in spasticity education to improve physician's scanning and injection technique, to address concerns about increased time requirements for injecting under ultrasound guidance and to address perceived disadvantages from clinicians.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72291,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation\",\"volume\":\"6 3\",\"pages\":\"Article 100353\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S259010952400051X/pdfft?md5=92e6d530463b08b02a4447f8f5f09421&pid=1-s2.0-S259010952400051X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S259010952400051X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S259010952400051X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
主要结果测量在痉挛临床实践中使用超声波的情况、感知到的障碍以及与实施超声波相关的风险。结果共有 36 名加拿大内科医生和外科医生做出了回应。共有 91% 的人表示在他们的临床实践中使用过超声波。几乎所有的人都使用超声波成像(US)来指导注射,并称在注射时使用了一种以上的指导技术。不到一半的调查对象表示使用 US 评估肌肉结构或纵向评估肌肉回声强度。共有 47% 的调查对象表示,他们认为在痉挛治疗实践中使用 US 存在不利因素。缺点包括所需时间增加,导致注射者和患者感到不适、术后感染风险以及针刺伤风险。与其他引导技术相比,US 技术需要更多的时间,这是发现的最重要的障碍。其他障碍包括:与电引导技术相比,在识别痉挛肌肉方面缺乏反馈;在超声引导下完成注射缺乏额外报酬;以及缺乏足够的培训。这项调查强调了痉挛教育课程转变的必要性,以改善医生的扫描和注射技术,解决在超声引导下注射所需时间增加的问题,并解决临床医生认为的不利因素。
Canadian Physicians’ Use of Ultrasound in Spasticity Treatment: A National Cross-Sectional Survey
Objective
To identify potential barriers and obstacles preventing clinicians from adopting ultrasound for spasticity management.
Design
A prospective, cross-sectional national survey.
Setting
Web-based platform.
Participants
Thirty-six physicians and surgeons from across Canada.
Interventions
Survey completion.
Main Outcome Measures
The use of ultrasound in clinical spasticity practice, perceived barriers, and risks associated with its implementation.
Results
In total, 36 Canadian physicians and surgeons responded. A total of 91% reported using the US in their practice. Nearly all of them used ultrasonography (US) to guide injections and reported using more than 1 guidance technique for their injections. Less than half of the survey respondents reported using the US for muscle architecture assessment or longitudinal evaluation of muscle echo intensity. A total of 47% of survey respondents reported that they believe there are disadvantages associated with US use in spasticity practice. Disadvantages included increased time requirements resulting in discomfort for the injector and patient, the risk of infection after the procedure, and the risk of needle-stick injury. The most important barrier identified was the increased time demands of US compared with other guidance techniques. Other barriers included a lack of feedback on identifying a spastic muscle compared with electrical guidance techniques, a lack of additional remuneration to complete injections under ultrasound guidance, and a lack of adequate training.
Conclusions
Future educational efforts should address clinicians’ lack of familiarity with US purposes outside of injection guidance. This survey has highlighted the need for a curriculum shift in spasticity education to improve physician's scanning and injection technique, to address concerns about increased time requirements for injecting under ultrasound guidance and to address perceived disadvantages from clinicians.