| Literature DB >> 30986892 |
Ying-Ying Yang1,2,3, Boaz Shulruf4.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Lack of confidence in suturing/ligature skills due to insufficient practices and assessments was common among novice Chinese medical interns. This study aims to improve the skill acquisition of medical interns with new interventional program.Entities:
Keywords: Artificial Intelligent; Suturing and Ligature Skills; Tiwan; Tutoring Course
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30986892 PMCID: PMC6517322 DOI: 10.3352/jeehp.2019.16.7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Educ Eval Health Prof ISSN: 1975-5937
Fig. 1.(A–D) Photo of the AI assessment/training system for suturing/ligature skills and images of medical interns practicing.
Baseline characteristics of all medical interns
| Characteristic | Regular group (n=25) | Expert-led tutoring group (n=24) | Expert-led+AI group (n=23) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean age (yr) | 27±4 | 28±2 | 29±3 |
| Gender distribution (male/female) | 14/11 | 12/12 | 12/11 |
| Prior experience of observing suturing/ligature skills on real patients (%) | 10/25 (40) | 11/24 (46) | 11/23 (48) |
| Baseline self-assessed confidence to perform suturing/ligatures on real patients (points out of 5) | 2.4±0.5 | 2.6±0.2 | 2.5±0.1 |
| Post-objective structured clinical examination self-assessed confidence to perform suturing/ligatures on real patients (points out of 5) | 2.7±0.1 | 3.4±0.3 | 4.0±0.5 |
| Percentage showing improvement in self-assessed confidence from baseline (%) | 15 | 31 | 60 |
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation or number, unless otherwise stated.
AI, artificial intelligence.
Comparison of the performance of medical interns among groups
| Variable | Regular group (n=25) | Expert-led tutoring group (n=24) | Expert-led+AI tutoring group (n=23) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of those who had a high level of interest (>3 points out of 5) in surgery at baseline (%) | 8/25 (32) | 8/24 (33) | 9/23 (39) |
| Performance of initial in-training assessment by expert | |||
| Technical performance | - | 69±8 | 70±5 |
| Global rating | - | 3.4±0.5 | 3.6±0.2 |
| Performance on common end-of-surgical block objective structured clinical examination | |||
| Technical performance | 71.5±3 | 79.1±4 (15% increase from baseline) | 90.2±2[ |
| Global rating | 3.7±0.3 | 4.0±0.6 (18% increase from baseline) | 4.5±0.9[ |
Values are presented as number (%) or mean±standard deviation, unless otherwise stated.
AI, artificial intelligence.
P<0.05 vs. expert-led tutoring group’s interns.
P<0.05 vs. regular group’s medical interns.
Average performance of interns in the expert-led+AI group on their last practice session according to frequency of practice with the AI system
| Variable | Technical performance score | Pass rate (%) | Follow-up self-assessed confidence to perform suturing and ligatures on real patients |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 Practice session (n=23) | 69.4±12 | 25.00±3.7 | 3.8±0.3 |
| 2 Practice sessions (n=13) | 80.4±9[ | 55.00±3.2[ | 4.0±0.12 |
| Absolute increase from baseline (%) | 11.08 | 30 | 0.2 |
| 3 Practice sessions (n=6) | 87.1±8[ | 81.00±3.8[ | 4.7±1.2[ |
| Absolute increase from baseline (%) | 17.7[ | 56[ | 0.9 |
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation or number, unless otherwise stated.
AI, artificial intelligence.
P<0.05 vs. the 1-practice group.
P<0.05 vs. the 2-practice group.