Cargando…

Immersive Video Modeling Versus Traditional Video Modeling for Teaching Central Venous Catheter Insertion to Medical Residents

Background  Central Venous Catheter (CVC) placement is a common critical care procedure. Simulated practice has been shown to reduce its iatrogenic complications. Video modeling (VM) is an instructional adjunct that improves the quality and success of CVC insertion. Immersive VM can improve recall a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mah, Evan, Yu, Julie, Deck, Megan, Lyster, Kish, Kawchuk, Joann, Turnquist, Alison, Thoma, Brent
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8017344/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33824812
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.13661
Descripción
Sumario:Background  Central Venous Catheter (CVC) placement is a common critical care procedure. Simulated practice has been shown to reduce its iatrogenic complications. Video modeling (VM) is an instructional adjunct that improves the quality and success of CVC insertion. Immersive VM can improve recall and skill translation, but its role in teaching medical procedures is not established. Research question/hypothesis We hypothesized that, relative to traditional VM, immersive VM would decrease cognitive load and enhance ultrasound-guided CVC insertion skill acquisition. Methods Thirty-two resident physicians from four specialties were randomized into traditional (control) or immersive VM (intervention) groups for three CVC training sessions. Cognitive load was quantified via NASA Task Load Index (TLX). Mean (± standard deviations) values were compared using two-tailed t-tests. Skill acquisition was quantified by procedural time and the average 5-point [EM1] [TB2] entrustment score of three expert raters. Results Overall entrustment scores improved from the first (3.44±0.98) to the third (4.06±1.23; p<0.002) session but were not significantly different between the control and intervention groups. There were no significant differences between NASA TLX scores or procedural time. Conclusion We found no significant difference in entrustment, cognitive load, or procedural time. Immersive VM was not found to be superior to traditional VM for teaching CVC insertion.