Michael J Barrington1, Laura P Viero, Roman Kluger, Alexander L Clarke, Jason J Ivanusic, Daniel M Wong. 1. From the *Department of Anaesthesia and Acute Pain Medicine, St Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne; and †Melbourne Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, ‡Department of Anatomy and Neurosciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to determine the learning curve for capturing sonograms and identifying anatomical structures relevant to ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus block and to determine if massed was superior to distributed practice for this core sonographic skill. METHODS:Ten University of Melbourne, third- or fourth-year Doctor of Medicine students were randomized to massed or distributed practice. Participants performed 15 supervised learning sessions comprising scanning followed by feedback. A "sonographic proficiency score" was calculated by summing parameters in acquiring and interpreting the sonogram, and identifying relevant anatomical structures. RESULTS: Between the 1st and 10th sessions, the proficiency scores increased (P = 0.043). Except for one, all participants had relatively rapid increases in their "sonographic proficiency scores." There was no difference in proficiency scores between the 15th and 10th sessions (P > 0.05). There was no difference in scores between groups for the first session, (P = 0.40), 15th session (P = 0.10), or at any time. There was no difference in the slope of the increase in "sonographic proficiency score" over the first 10 scanning sessions between groups [massed, 1.1 (0.32); distributed, 0.90 (0.15); P = 0.22) presented as mean (SD)]. The 95% confidence interval for the difference in slopes between massed and distributed groups was -0.15 to 0.56. CONCLUSIONS: The proficiency of participants in capturing sonograms and identifying anatomical structures improved significantly over 8 to 10 learning sessions. Because of sample size issues, we cannot make a firm conclusion regarding massed versus distributed practice for this core sonographic skill.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to determine the learning curve for capturing sonograms and identifying anatomical structures relevant to ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus block and to determine if massed was superior to distributed practice for this core sonographic skill. METHODS: Ten University of Melbourne, third- or fourth-year Doctor of Medicine students were randomized to massed or distributed practice. Participants performed 15 supervised learning sessions comprising scanning followed by feedback. A "sonographic proficiency score" was calculated by summing parameters in acquiring and interpreting the sonogram, and identifying relevant anatomical structures. RESULTS: Between the 1st and 10th sessions, the proficiency scores increased (P = 0.043). Except for one, all participants had relatively rapid increases in their "sonographic proficiency scores." There was no difference in proficiency scores between the 15th and 10th sessions (P > 0.05). There was no difference in scores between groups for the first session, (P = 0.40), 15th session (P = 0.10), or at any time. There was no difference in the slope of the increase in "sonographic proficiency score" over the first 10 scanning sessions between groups [massed, 1.1 (0.32); distributed, 0.90 (0.15); P = 0.22) presented as mean (SD)]. The 95% confidence interval for the difference in slopes between massed and distributed groups was -0.15 to 0.56. CONCLUSIONS: The proficiency of participants in capturing sonograms and identifying anatomical structures improved significantly over 8 to 10 learning sessions. Because of sample size issues, we cannot make a firm conclusion regarding massed versus distributed practice for this core sonographic skill.
Authors: Richard A Hoppmann; Jeanette Mladenovic; Lawrence Melniker; Radu Badea; Michael Blaivas; Miguel Montorfano; Alfred Abuhamad; Vicki Noble; Arif Hussain; Gregor Prosen; Tomás Villen; Gabriele Via; Ramon Nogue; Craig Goodmurphy; Marcus Bastos; G Stephen Nace; Giovanni Volpicelli; Richard J Wakefield; Steve Wilson; Anjali Bhagra; Jongyeol Kim; David Bahner; Chris Fox; Ruth Riley; Peter Steinmetz; Bret P Nelson; John Pellerito; Levon N Nazarian; L Britt Wilson; Irene W Y Ma; David Amponsah; Keith R Barron; Renee K Dversdal; Mike Wagner; Anthony J Dean; David Tierney; James W Tsung; Paula Nocera; José Pazeli; Rachel Liu; Susanna Price; Luca Neri; Barbara Piccirillo; Adi Osman; Vaughan Lee; Nitha Naqvi; Tomislav Petrovic; Paul Bornemann; Maxime Valois; Jean-Francoise Lanctot; Robert Haddad; Deepak Govil; Laura A Hurtado; Vi Am Dinh; Robert M DePhilip; Beatrice Hoffmann; Resa E Lewiss; Nayana A Parange; Akira Nishisaki; Stephanie J Doniger; Paul Dallas; Kevin Bergman; J Oscar Barahona; Ximena Wortsman; R Stephen Smith; Craig A Sisson; James Palma; Mike Mallin; Liju Ahmed; Hassan Mustafa Journal: Ultrasound J Date: 2022-07-27
Authors: Marjolein Versteeg; Renée A Hendriks; Aliki Thomas; Belinda W C Ommering; Paul Steendijk Journal: Med Educ Date: 2019-12-20 Impact factor: 6.251