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,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bidner, Amber, Bezak, Eva, Parange, Nayana
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