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
_version_ 1783674047565922304
author Mah, Evan
Yu, Julie
Deck, Megan
Lyster, Kish
Kawchuk, Joann
Turnquist, Alison
Thoma, Brent
author_facet Mah, Evan
Yu, Julie
Deck, Megan
Lyster, Kish
Kawchuk, Joann
Turnquist, Alison
Thoma, Brent
author_sort Mah, Evan
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8017344
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Cureus
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80173442021-04-05 Immersive Video Modeling Versus Traditional Video Modeling for Teaching Central Venous Catheter Insertion to Medical Residents Mah, Evan Yu, Julie Deck, Megan Lyster, Kish Kawchuk, Joann Turnquist, Alison Thoma, Brent Cureus Emergency Medicine 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. Cureus 2021-03-02 /pmc/articles/PMC8017344/ /pubmed/33824812 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.13661 Text en Copyright © 2021, Mah et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Emergency Medicine
Mah, Evan
Yu, Julie
Deck, Megan
Lyster, Kish
Kawchuk, Joann
Turnquist, Alison
Thoma, Brent
Immersive Video Modeling Versus Traditional Video Modeling for Teaching Central Venous Catheter Insertion to Medical Residents
title Immersive Video Modeling Versus Traditional Video Modeling for Teaching Central Venous Catheter Insertion to Medical Residents
title_full Immersive Video Modeling Versus Traditional Video Modeling for Teaching Central Venous Catheter Insertion to Medical Residents
title_fullStr Immersive Video Modeling Versus Traditional Video Modeling for Teaching Central Venous Catheter Insertion to Medical Residents
title_full_unstemmed Immersive Video Modeling Versus Traditional Video Modeling for Teaching Central Venous Catheter Insertion to Medical Residents
title_short Immersive Video Modeling Versus Traditional Video Modeling for Teaching Central Venous Catheter Insertion to Medical Residents
title_sort immersive video modeling versus traditional video modeling for teaching central venous catheter insertion to medical residents
topic Emergency Medicine
url 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
work_keys_str_mv AT mahevan immersivevideomodelingversustraditionalvideomodelingforteachingcentralvenouscatheterinsertiontomedicalresidents
AT yujulie immersivevideomodelingversustraditionalvideomodelingforteachingcentralvenouscatheterinsertiontomedicalresidents
AT deckmegan immersivevideomodelingversustraditionalvideomodelingforteachingcentralvenouscatheterinsertiontomedicalresidents
AT lysterkish immersivevideomodelingversustraditionalvideomodelingforteachingcentralvenouscatheterinsertiontomedicalresidents
AT kawchukjoann immersivevideomodelingversustraditionalvideomodelingforteachingcentralvenouscatheterinsertiontomedicalresidents
AT turnquistalison immersivevideomodelingversustraditionalvideomodelingforteachingcentralvenouscatheterinsertiontomedicalresidents
AT thomabrent immersivevideomodelingversustraditionalvideomodelingforteachingcentralvenouscatheterinsertiontomedicalresidents