151. A prospective randomized study to compare standard versus intensive training strategies on long-term improvement in critical care ultrasonography proficiency.
- Author
-
Suzuki R, Kanai M, Oya K, Harada Y, Horie R, and Sekiguchi H
- Subjects
- Humans, Curriculum, Fellowships and Scholarships, Prospective Studies, Clinical Competence, Critical Care, Ultrasonography
- Abstract
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., (© 2022. The Author(s).)
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF