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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Abraham, Siju V., Melit, Ronald Jaison, Krishnan, S. Vimal, George, Tijo, Kunhahamed, Meenhas Oravil, Kassyap, C. K., Bhoi, Sanjeev, Sinha, Tej Prakash
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