Cargando…
Language of transducer manipulation 2.0: continuing to codify terms for effective teaching
OBJECTIVES: Accurate communication is an integral component of ultrasound education. In light of the recent global pandemic, this has become even more crucial as many have moved to virtual education out of necessity. Several studies and publications have sought to establish common terminology for ca...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8555041/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34709487 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13089-021-00245-3 |
_version_ | 1784591898860584960 |
---|---|
author | End, Bradley Prats, Michael I. Minardi, Joseph Sharon, Melinda Bahner, David P. Boulger, Creagh T. |
author_facet | End, Bradley Prats, Michael I. Minardi, Joseph Sharon, Melinda Bahner, David P. Boulger, Creagh T. |
author_sort | End, Bradley |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: Accurate communication is an integral component of ultrasound education. In light of the recent global pandemic, this has become even more crucial as many have moved to virtual education out of necessity. Several studies and publications have sought to establish common terminology for cardinal ultrasound probe motions. To date, no studies have been performed to determine which of these terms have been adopted by the ultrasound community at large. METHODS: A survey was developed which asked respondents to describe videos of six common probe motions in addition to providing basic demographic and training data. The survey was disseminated electronically across various academic listservs and open access resources. RESULTS: Data were collected over a 6-week period and yielded 418 unique responses. Responses demonstrated significant variation in terminology related to all 6 cardinal probe motions. While some degree of difference in response can be accounted for by discipline of training, inter-group variation still exists in terminology to describe common probe motions. Of the survey respondents, 57.5% felt that inconsistent probe motion terminology made teaching ultrasound more difficult. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that despite efforts to codify probe motions, variation still exists between ultrasound practitioners and educators in the description of cardinal probe motions. This lack of consensus can contribute to challenges in both virtual and in-person ultrasound education. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8555041 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-85550412021-11-10 Language of transducer manipulation 2.0: continuing to codify terms for effective teaching End, Bradley Prats, Michael I. Minardi, Joseph Sharon, Melinda Bahner, David P. Boulger, Creagh T. Ultrasound J Original Article OBJECTIVES: Accurate communication is an integral component of ultrasound education. In light of the recent global pandemic, this has become even more crucial as many have moved to virtual education out of necessity. Several studies and publications have sought to establish common terminology for cardinal ultrasound probe motions. To date, no studies have been performed to determine which of these terms have been adopted by the ultrasound community at large. METHODS: A survey was developed which asked respondents to describe videos of six common probe motions in addition to providing basic demographic and training data. The survey was disseminated electronically across various academic listservs and open access resources. RESULTS: Data were collected over a 6-week period and yielded 418 unique responses. Responses demonstrated significant variation in terminology related to all 6 cardinal probe motions. While some degree of difference in response can be accounted for by discipline of training, inter-group variation still exists in terminology to describe common probe motions. Of the survey respondents, 57.5% felt that inconsistent probe motion terminology made teaching ultrasound more difficult. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that despite efforts to codify probe motions, variation still exists between ultrasound practitioners and educators in the description of cardinal probe motions. This lack of consensus can contribute to challenges in both virtual and in-person ultrasound education. Springer International Publishing 2021-10-28 /pmc/articles/PMC8555041/ /pubmed/34709487 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13089-021-00245-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article End, Bradley Prats, Michael I. Minardi, Joseph Sharon, Melinda Bahner, David P. Boulger, Creagh T. Language of transducer manipulation 2.0: continuing to codify terms for effective teaching |
title | Language of transducer manipulation 2.0: continuing to codify terms for effective teaching |
title_full | Language of transducer manipulation 2.0: continuing to codify terms for effective teaching |
title_fullStr | Language of transducer manipulation 2.0: continuing to codify terms for effective teaching |
title_full_unstemmed | Language of transducer manipulation 2.0: continuing to codify terms for effective teaching |
title_short | Language of transducer manipulation 2.0: continuing to codify terms for effective teaching |
title_sort | language of transducer manipulation 2.0: continuing to codify terms for effective teaching |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8555041/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34709487 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13089-021-00245-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT endbradley languageoftransducermanipulation20continuingtocodifytermsforeffectiveteaching AT pratsmichaeli languageoftransducermanipulation20continuingtocodifytermsforeffectiveteaching AT minardijoseph languageoftransducermanipulation20continuingtocodifytermsforeffectiveteaching AT sharonmelinda languageoftransducermanipulation20continuingtocodifytermsforeffectiveteaching AT bahnerdavidp languageoftransducermanipulation20continuingtocodifytermsforeffectiveteaching AT boulgercreaght languageoftransducermanipulation20continuingtocodifytermsforeffectiveteaching |