A prospective randomized study to compare standard versus intensive training strategies on long-term improvement in critical care ultrasonography proficiency

BACKGROUND: Critical care ultrasonography (CCUS) has become a daily diagnostic tool for intensivists. While the effective training measures for ultrasound novices are discussed widely, the best curriculum for the novices to retain a long-term proficiency is yet to be determined. METHODS: Critical care medicine fellows who underwent an introductory CCUS workshop were randomly allocated into the standard training (ST) or the intensive training (IT) group. The IT group received an 8-h training besides the standardized fellowship education that the ST group received. Participant improvement in CCUS proficiency tests (maximum score, 200) after a 6-month training intervention was compared between the groups. CCUS examinations performed in patient care were observed over 2 years. RESULTS: Twenty-one fellows were allocated into the ST (n = 10) or the IT (n = 11) group. No statistically significant difference was observed in the median (interquartile range [IQR]) improvement in CCUS proficiency tests between the ST group and the IT group: 18 (3.8–38) versus 31 (21–46) (P = .09). Median (IQR) test scores were significantly higher in postintervention than preintervention for both groups: ST, 103 (87–116) versus 124 (111–143) (P = .02), and IT, 100 (87–113) versus 143 (121–149) (P < .01). Participating fellows performed 226 examinations over the 2 years of observation. CONCLUSIONS: Fellows improved their CCUS proficiency significantly after 6-month training intervention. However, an additional 8-h training did not provide further benefits. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-022-03780-2.