Cargando…
Indigenously Developed Ultrasound Phantom Model versus a Commercially Available Training Model: Randomized Double-blinded Study to Assess Its Utility to Teach Ultrasound Guided Vascular Access in a Controlled Setting
BACKGROUND: The commercially available training phantoms being expensive, homemade models are popular surrogates for training. We intended to study how comparable our indigenously developed ultrasound phantom (IDUP) was with the commercially available model for ultrasound-guided vascular access (USG...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9030346/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35465598 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JMU.JMU_48_21 |
_version_ | 1784692116330381312 |
---|---|
author | Abraham, Siju V. Melit, Ronald Jaison Krishnan, S. Vimal George, Tijo Kunhahamed, Meenhas Oravil Kassyap, C. K. Bhoi, Sanjeev Sinha, Tej Prakash |
author_facet | Abraham, Siju V. Melit, Ronald Jaison Krishnan, S. Vimal George, Tijo Kunhahamed, Meenhas Oravil Kassyap, C. K. Bhoi, Sanjeev Sinha, Tej Prakash |
author_sort | Abraham, Siju V. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The commercially available training phantoms being expensive, homemade models are popular surrogates for training. We intended to study how comparable our indigenously developed ultrasound phantom (IDUP) was with the commercially available model for ultrasound-guided vascular access (USGVA) training. We also assessed the change in confidence among trainees using a 21-h standardized program. METHODS: A prospective randomized double-blinded, parallel design study, with sequential allocation, was done after a standardized point of care ultrasound training course. Over three consecutive courses, 48 trainees volunteered to take part in the study. The models (IDUP and commercial phantom) were allocated as model A and model B. In each course, participants were also allotted sequentially to either perform in-plane or out of plane approach first, at the testing stations. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare pretest with posttest scores. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant difference between IDUP and commercial phantom with respect to the resemblance to human tissue on tactile feedback and ease to perform the procedure. However, both models did not show a statistically significant difference in terms of ease of use, visual resemblance to human tissue, needle visualization, and artifacts on ultrasonography display. A significant change in the confidence levels of participants was seen postcourse. CONCLUSION: IDUP was a comparable alternative to the commercial model for USGVA training in a resource-limited setting. A 21-h standardized training program improved the trainee's confidence in performing and teaching USGVA. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9030346 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Wolters Kluwer - Medknow |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-90303462022-04-23 Indigenously Developed Ultrasound Phantom Model versus a Commercially Available Training Model: Randomized Double-blinded Study to Assess Its Utility to Teach Ultrasound Guided Vascular Access in a Controlled Setting Abraham, Siju V. Melit, Ronald Jaison Krishnan, S. Vimal George, Tijo Kunhahamed, Meenhas Oravil Kassyap, C. K. Bhoi, Sanjeev Sinha, Tej Prakash J Med Ultrasound Original Article BACKGROUND: The commercially available training phantoms being expensive, homemade models are popular surrogates for training. We intended to study how comparable our indigenously developed ultrasound phantom (IDUP) was with the commercially available model for ultrasound-guided vascular access (USGVA) training. We also assessed the change in confidence among trainees using a 21-h standardized program. METHODS: A prospective randomized double-blinded, parallel design study, with sequential allocation, was done after a standardized point of care ultrasound training course. Over three consecutive courses, 48 trainees volunteered to take part in the study. The models (IDUP and commercial phantom) were allocated as model A and model B. In each course, participants were also allotted sequentially to either perform in-plane or out of plane approach first, at the testing stations. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare pretest with posttest scores. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant difference between IDUP and commercial phantom with respect to the resemblance to human tissue on tactile feedback and ease to perform the procedure. However, both models did not show a statistically significant difference in terms of ease of use, visual resemblance to human tissue, needle visualization, and artifacts on ultrasonography display. A significant change in the confidence levels of participants was seen postcourse. CONCLUSION: IDUP was a comparable alternative to the commercial model for USGVA training in a resource-limited setting. A 21-h standardized training program improved the trainee's confidence in performing and teaching USGVA. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2022-03-23 /pmc/articles/PMC9030346/ /pubmed/35465598 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JMU.JMU_48_21 Text en Copyright: © 2022 Journal of Medical Ultrasound https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Abraham, Siju V. Melit, Ronald Jaison Krishnan, S. Vimal George, Tijo Kunhahamed, Meenhas Oravil Kassyap, C. K. Bhoi, Sanjeev Sinha, Tej Prakash Indigenously Developed Ultrasound Phantom Model versus a Commercially Available Training Model: Randomized Double-blinded Study to Assess Its Utility to Teach Ultrasound Guided Vascular Access in a Controlled Setting |
title | Indigenously Developed Ultrasound Phantom Model versus a Commercially Available Training Model: Randomized Double-blinded Study to Assess Its Utility to Teach Ultrasound Guided Vascular Access in a Controlled Setting |
title_full | Indigenously Developed Ultrasound Phantom Model versus a Commercially Available Training Model: Randomized Double-blinded Study to Assess Its Utility to Teach Ultrasound Guided Vascular Access in a Controlled Setting |
title_fullStr | Indigenously Developed Ultrasound Phantom Model versus a Commercially Available Training Model: Randomized Double-blinded Study to Assess Its Utility to Teach Ultrasound Guided Vascular Access in a Controlled Setting |
title_full_unstemmed | Indigenously Developed Ultrasound Phantom Model versus a Commercially Available Training Model: Randomized Double-blinded Study to Assess Its Utility to Teach Ultrasound Guided Vascular Access in a Controlled Setting |
title_short | Indigenously Developed Ultrasound Phantom Model versus a Commercially Available Training Model: Randomized Double-blinded Study to Assess Its Utility to Teach Ultrasound Guided Vascular Access in a Controlled Setting |
title_sort | indigenously developed ultrasound phantom model versus a commercially available training model: randomized double-blinded study to assess its utility to teach ultrasound guided vascular access in a controlled setting |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9030346/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35465598 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JMU.JMU_48_21 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT abrahamsijuv indigenouslydevelopedultrasoundphantommodelversusacommerciallyavailabletrainingmodelrandomizeddoubleblindedstudytoassessitsutilitytoteachultrasoundguidedvascularaccessinacontrolledsetting AT melitronaldjaison indigenouslydevelopedultrasoundphantommodelversusacommerciallyavailabletrainingmodelrandomizeddoubleblindedstudytoassessitsutilitytoteachultrasoundguidedvascularaccessinacontrolledsetting AT krishnansvimal indigenouslydevelopedultrasoundphantommodelversusacommerciallyavailabletrainingmodelrandomizeddoubleblindedstudytoassessitsutilitytoteachultrasoundguidedvascularaccessinacontrolledsetting AT georgetijo indigenouslydevelopedultrasoundphantommodelversusacommerciallyavailabletrainingmodelrandomizeddoubleblindedstudytoassessitsutilitytoteachultrasoundguidedvascularaccessinacontrolledsetting AT kunhahamedmeenhasoravil indigenouslydevelopedultrasoundphantommodelversusacommerciallyavailabletrainingmodelrandomizeddoubleblindedstudytoassessitsutilitytoteachultrasoundguidedvascularaccessinacontrolledsetting AT kassyapck indigenouslydevelopedultrasoundphantommodelversusacommerciallyavailabletrainingmodelrandomizeddoubleblindedstudytoassessitsutilitytoteachultrasoundguidedvascularaccessinacontrolledsetting AT bhoisanjeev indigenouslydevelopedultrasoundphantommodelversusacommerciallyavailabletrainingmodelrandomizeddoubleblindedstudytoassessitsutilitytoteachultrasoundguidedvascularaccessinacontrolledsetting AT sinhatejprakash indigenouslydevelopedultrasoundphantommodelversusacommerciallyavailabletrainingmodelrandomizeddoubleblindedstudytoassessitsutilitytoteachultrasoundguidedvascularaccessinacontrolledsetting |