Cargando…
Evaluation of antenatal Point-of-Care Ultrasound (PoCUS) training: a systematic review
INTRODUCTION: There is limited access to life-saving antenatal ultrasound in rural and low-resource settings largely due to shortages in skilled staff. Studies have shown healthcare practitioners can be upskilled in PoCUS through focused training, offering a viable solution to this deficit. However,...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Taylor & Francis
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8986272/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35382705 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2022.2041366 |
_version_ | 1784682510477688832 |
---|---|
author | Bidner, Amber Bezak, Eva Parange, Nayana |
author_facet | Bidner, Amber Bezak, Eva Parange, Nayana |
author_sort | Bidner, Amber |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: There is limited access to life-saving antenatal ultrasound in rural and low-resource settings largely due to shortages in skilled staff. Studies have shown healthcare practitioners can be upskilled in PoCUS through focused training, offering a viable solution to this deficit. However, standards for training and competency assessment are unclear and regulation surrounding practice is lacking. We aimed to review published literature examining antenatal PoCUS training programs, comparing teaching approaches and study methodologies. METHODS: A search of electronic databases EMBASE, MEDLINE and Google Scholar was conducted. Original research articles evaluating antenatal PoCUS training of healthcare professionals worldwide were identified for analysis. Articles with limited detail on the PoCUS training intervention and those describing comprehensive diagnostic training programs were excluded. Evaluations were compared against the Kirkpatrick Evaluation Framework (KEF). RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies were included from an initial search result of 484 articles. There was considerable heterogeneity between the PoCUS training programs described. Course duration ranged from 3 hours to 2 years, with 11 of the 27 studies delivering obstetric-exclusive content. 44% trained multidisciplinary groups of health professionals. Long-term follow-up training and skills assessments were lacking in over half of the reviewed studies. Study quality and reporting detail varied, but overall beneficial outcomes were reported with 3/4s of the studies reaching upper KEF levels 3 and 4. CONCLUSION: PoCUS performed by upskilled healthcare professionals offers an attractive solution to the problem of inequitable access to antenatal ultrasound. A review of available literature highlighted a paucity of comparable high-quality studies needed to establish a stronger evidence base for antenatal PoCUS, and a need to standardise training and competency assessment. This review may inform educators, researchers and policy-makers on existing training formats and methodologies to assist in establishing best practice antenatal PoCUS training methods for safe service delivery by remote healthcare professionals. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8986272 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Taylor & Francis |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89862722022-04-07 Evaluation of antenatal Point-of-Care Ultrasound (PoCUS) training: a systematic review Bidner, Amber Bezak, Eva Parange, Nayana Med Educ Online Review Article INTRODUCTION: There is limited access to life-saving antenatal ultrasound in rural and low-resource settings largely due to shortages in skilled staff. Studies have shown healthcare practitioners can be upskilled in PoCUS through focused training, offering a viable solution to this deficit. However, standards for training and competency assessment are unclear and regulation surrounding practice is lacking. We aimed to review published literature examining antenatal PoCUS training programs, comparing teaching approaches and study methodologies. METHODS: A search of electronic databases EMBASE, MEDLINE and Google Scholar was conducted. Original research articles evaluating antenatal PoCUS training of healthcare professionals worldwide were identified for analysis. Articles with limited detail on the PoCUS training intervention and those describing comprehensive diagnostic training programs were excluded. Evaluations were compared against the Kirkpatrick Evaluation Framework (KEF). RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies were included from an initial search result of 484 articles. There was considerable heterogeneity between the PoCUS training programs described. Course duration ranged from 3 hours to 2 years, with 11 of the 27 studies delivering obstetric-exclusive content. 44% trained multidisciplinary groups of health professionals. Long-term follow-up training and skills assessments were lacking in over half of the reviewed studies. Study quality and reporting detail varied, but overall beneficial outcomes were reported with 3/4s of the studies reaching upper KEF levels 3 and 4. CONCLUSION: PoCUS performed by upskilled healthcare professionals offers an attractive solution to the problem of inequitable access to antenatal ultrasound. A review of available literature highlighted a paucity of comparable high-quality studies needed to establish a stronger evidence base for antenatal PoCUS, and a need to standardise training and competency assessment. This review may inform educators, researchers and policy-makers on existing training formats and methodologies to assist in establishing best practice antenatal PoCUS training methods for safe service delivery by remote healthcare professionals. Taylor & Francis 2022-04-05 /pmc/articles/PMC8986272/ /pubmed/35382705 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2022.2041366 Text en © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Review Article Bidner, Amber Bezak, Eva Parange, Nayana Evaluation of antenatal Point-of-Care Ultrasound (PoCUS) training: a systematic review |
title | Evaluation of antenatal Point-of-Care Ultrasound (PoCUS) training: a systematic review |
title_full | Evaluation of antenatal Point-of-Care Ultrasound (PoCUS) training: a systematic review |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of antenatal Point-of-Care Ultrasound (PoCUS) training: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of antenatal Point-of-Care Ultrasound (PoCUS) training: a systematic review |
title_short | Evaluation of antenatal Point-of-Care Ultrasound (PoCUS) training: a systematic review |
title_sort | evaluation of antenatal point-of-care ultrasound (pocus) training: a systematic review |
topic | Review Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8986272/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35382705 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2022.2041366 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bidneramber evaluationofantenatalpointofcareultrasoundpocustrainingasystematicreview AT bezakeva evaluationofantenatalpointofcareultrasoundpocustrainingasystematicreview AT parangenayana evaluationofantenatalpointofcareultrasoundpocustrainingasystematicreview |