Comparisons of two diaphragm ultrasound-teaching programs: a multicenter randomized controlled educational study

Antonino Giarratano, Andrea Cortegiani, Daniele Guerino Biasucci, Rosanna Vaschetto, Luigi Vetrugno, Gianmaria Cammarota, Federico Longhini, Marinella Astuto, Giorgio Conti, Massimo Zambon, Corrado Pelaia, Eugenio Garofalo, Andrea Bruni, Valentina Bellini, Paolo Murabito, Francesco Forfori, Elena Bignami, Alberto Zangrillo, Paolo Navalesi, Francesco CorradiTiziana Bove, Giovanni Landoni, Giovanna Mercurio, Massimo Antonelli

Risultato della ricerca: Article

Abstract

BACKGROUND:This study aims to ascertain whether (1) an educational program is sufficient to achieve adequate Diaphragm Ultrasound (DUS) assessments on healthy volunteers and (2) combining a video tutorial with a practical session is more effective in making learners capable to obtain accurate DUS measurements, as opposed to sole video tutorial.RESULTS:We enrolledstep 1: 172 volunteers naïve to ultrasound. After watching a video tutorial, a questionnaire was administered and considered to be passed when at least 70% of the questions were correctly answered. Course participants who passed the theoretical test were randomized to either intervention or control group. Learners randomized to the interventional group underwent to a practical training, tutored by an expert, before accessing DUS examination. Participants randomized to the control group directly accessed DUS examination, without any practical training. DUS measurements by learners and tutors were recorded and checked for accuracy, according to predefined criteria. Detection of both acoustic windows and accurate DUS assessment was achieved by 83.7% learners of the intervention group while 3.5% only among controls (p < 0.0001). The subcostal view of the diaphragm was correctly identified by 92% and 65% learners in the intervention and control groups, respectively (p < 0.0001) while the apposition zone by 86% and 71% learners, respectively (p = 0.026). An accurate diaphragm displacement (DD) measurement was obtained by 91% and 45% learners in the intervention and control groups, respectively (p < 0.0001) while an accurate thickening fraction (TF) measurement by 99% and 21%, respectively (p < 0.0001). DD measurements by both groups of learners were significantly correlated with those assessed by expert tutors; however, a significant improvement of measurement accuracy was found in learners randomized to receive also the practical training, compared to controls.CONCLUSIONS:A combined approach consisting of a theoretical module followed by a practical training is more effective in managing acoustic windows and performing accurate measurements when compared to an exclusively theoretical course. Trial registration prospectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier: NCT03704129; release date 17th October 2018).
Lingua originaleEnglish
Numero di pagine6
RivistaTHE ULTRASOUND JOURNAL
Volume11
Stato di pubblicazionePublished - 2019

Fingerprint

Diaphragm
Teaching
Control Groups
Acoustics
Volunteers
Healthy Volunteers

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cita questo

Comparisons of two diaphragm ultrasound-teaching programs: a multicenter randomized controlled educational study. / Giarratano, Antonino; Cortegiani, Andrea; Biasucci, Daniele Guerino; Vaschetto, Rosanna; Vetrugno, Luigi; Cammarota, Gianmaria; Longhini, Federico; Astuto, Marinella; Conti, Giorgio; Zambon, Massimo; Pelaia, Corrado; Garofalo, Eugenio; Bruni, Andrea; Bellini, Valentina; Murabito, Paolo; Forfori, Francesco; Bignami, Elena; Zangrillo, Alberto; Navalesi, Paolo; Corradi, Francesco; Bove, Tiziana; Landoni, Giovanni; Mercurio, Giovanna; Antonelli, Massimo.

In: THE ULTRASOUND JOURNAL, Vol. 11, 2019.

Risultato della ricerca: Article

Giarratano, A, Cortegiani, A, Biasucci, DG, Vaschetto, R, Vetrugno, L, Cammarota, G, Longhini, F, Astuto, M, Conti, G, Zambon, M, Pelaia, C, Garofalo, E, Bruni, A, Bellini, V, Murabito, P, Forfori, F, Bignami, E, Zangrillo, A, Navalesi, P, Corradi, F, Bove, T, Landoni, G, Mercurio, G & Antonelli, M 2019, 'Comparisons of two diaphragm ultrasound-teaching programs: a multicenter randomized controlled educational study', THE ULTRASOUND JOURNAL, vol. 11.
Giarratano, Antonino ; Cortegiani, Andrea ; Biasucci, Daniele Guerino ; Vaschetto, Rosanna ; Vetrugno, Luigi ; Cammarota, Gianmaria ; Longhini, Federico ; Astuto, Marinella ; Conti, Giorgio ; Zambon, Massimo ; Pelaia, Corrado ; Garofalo, Eugenio ; Bruni, Andrea ; Bellini, Valentina ; Murabito, Paolo ; Forfori, Francesco ; Bignami, Elena ; Zangrillo, Alberto ; Navalesi, Paolo ; Corradi, Francesco ; Bove, Tiziana ; Landoni, Giovanni ; Mercurio, Giovanna ; Antonelli, Massimo. / Comparisons of two diaphragm ultrasound-teaching programs: a multicenter randomized controlled educational study. In: THE ULTRASOUND JOURNAL. 2019 ; Vol. 11.
@article{79c26775e5134270b5cf78bed5f0ac48,
title = "Comparisons of two diaphragm ultrasound-teaching programs: a multicenter randomized controlled educational study",
abstract = "BACKGROUND:This study aims to ascertain whether (1) an educational program is sufficient to achieve adequate Diaphragm Ultrasound (DUS) assessments on healthy volunteers and (2) combining a video tutorial with a practical session is more effective in making learners capable to obtain accurate DUS measurements, as opposed to sole video tutorial.RESULTS:We enrolledstep 1: 172 volunteers na{\"i}ve to ultrasound. After watching a video tutorial, a questionnaire was administered and considered to be passed when at least 70{\%} of the questions were correctly answered. Course participants who passed the theoretical test were randomized to either intervention or control group. Learners randomized to the interventional group underwent to a practical training, tutored by an expert, before accessing DUS examination. Participants randomized to the control group directly accessed DUS examination, without any practical training. DUS measurements by learners and tutors were recorded and checked for accuracy, according to predefined criteria. Detection of both acoustic windows and accurate DUS assessment was achieved by 83.7{\%} learners of the intervention group while 3.5{\%} only among controls (p < 0.0001). The subcostal view of the diaphragm was correctly identified by 92{\%} and 65{\%} learners in the intervention and control groups, respectively (p < 0.0001) while the apposition zone by 86{\%} and 71{\%} learners, respectively (p = 0.026). An accurate diaphragm displacement (DD) measurement was obtained by 91{\%} and 45{\%} learners in the intervention and control groups, respectively (p < 0.0001) while an accurate thickening fraction (TF) measurement by 99{\%} and 21{\%}, respectively (p < 0.0001). DD measurements by both groups of learners were significantly correlated with those assessed by expert tutors; however, a significant improvement of measurement accuracy was found in learners randomized to receive also the practical training, compared to controls.CONCLUSIONS:A combined approach consisting of a theoretical module followed by a practical training is more effective in managing acoustic windows and performing accurate measurements when compared to an exclusively theoretical course. Trial registration prospectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier: NCT03704129; release date 17th October 2018).",
author = "Antonino Giarratano and Andrea Cortegiani and Biasucci, {Daniele Guerino} and Rosanna Vaschetto and Luigi Vetrugno and Gianmaria Cammarota and Federico Longhini and Marinella Astuto and Giorgio Conti and Massimo Zambon and Corrado Pelaia and Eugenio Garofalo and Andrea Bruni and Valentina Bellini and Paolo Murabito and Francesco Forfori and Elena Bignami and Alberto Zangrillo and Paolo Navalesi and Francesco Corradi and Tiziana Bove and Giovanni Landoni and Giovanna Mercurio and Massimo Antonelli",
year = "2019",
language = "English",
volume = "11",
journal = "THE ULTRASOUND JOURNAL",
issn = "2524-8987",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparisons of two diaphragm ultrasound-teaching programs: a multicenter randomized controlled educational study

AU - Giarratano, Antonino

AU - Cortegiani, Andrea

AU - Biasucci, Daniele Guerino

AU - Vaschetto, Rosanna

AU - Vetrugno, Luigi

AU - Cammarota, Gianmaria

AU - Longhini, Federico

AU - Astuto, Marinella

AU - Conti, Giorgio

AU - Zambon, Massimo

AU - Pelaia, Corrado

AU - Garofalo, Eugenio

AU - Bruni, Andrea

AU - Bellini, Valentina

AU - Murabito, Paolo

AU - Forfori, Francesco

AU - Bignami, Elena

AU - Zangrillo, Alberto

AU - Navalesi, Paolo

AU - Corradi, Francesco

AU - Bove, Tiziana

AU - Landoni, Giovanni

AU - Mercurio, Giovanna

AU - Antonelli, Massimo

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - BACKGROUND:This study aims to ascertain whether (1) an educational program is sufficient to achieve adequate Diaphragm Ultrasound (DUS) assessments on healthy volunteers and (2) combining a video tutorial with a practical session is more effective in making learners capable to obtain accurate DUS measurements, as opposed to sole video tutorial.RESULTS:We enrolledstep 1: 172 volunteers naïve to ultrasound. After watching a video tutorial, a questionnaire was administered and considered to be passed when at least 70% of the questions were correctly answered. Course participants who passed the theoretical test were randomized to either intervention or control group. Learners randomized to the interventional group underwent to a practical training, tutored by an expert, before accessing DUS examination. Participants randomized to the control group directly accessed DUS examination, without any practical training. DUS measurements by learners and tutors were recorded and checked for accuracy, according to predefined criteria. Detection of both acoustic windows and accurate DUS assessment was achieved by 83.7% learners of the intervention group while 3.5% only among controls (p < 0.0001). The subcostal view of the diaphragm was correctly identified by 92% and 65% learners in the intervention and control groups, respectively (p < 0.0001) while the apposition zone by 86% and 71% learners, respectively (p = 0.026). An accurate diaphragm displacement (DD) measurement was obtained by 91% and 45% learners in the intervention and control groups, respectively (p < 0.0001) while an accurate thickening fraction (TF) measurement by 99% and 21%, respectively (p < 0.0001). DD measurements by both groups of learners were significantly correlated with those assessed by expert tutors; however, a significant improvement of measurement accuracy was found in learners randomized to receive also the practical training, compared to controls.CONCLUSIONS:A combined approach consisting of a theoretical module followed by a practical training is more effective in managing acoustic windows and performing accurate measurements when compared to an exclusively theoretical course. Trial registration prospectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier: NCT03704129; release date 17th October 2018).

AB - BACKGROUND:This study aims to ascertain whether (1) an educational program is sufficient to achieve adequate Diaphragm Ultrasound (DUS) assessments on healthy volunteers and (2) combining a video tutorial with a practical session is more effective in making learners capable to obtain accurate DUS measurements, as opposed to sole video tutorial.RESULTS:We enrolledstep 1: 172 volunteers naïve to ultrasound. After watching a video tutorial, a questionnaire was administered and considered to be passed when at least 70% of the questions were correctly answered. Course participants who passed the theoretical test were randomized to either intervention or control group. Learners randomized to the interventional group underwent to a practical training, tutored by an expert, before accessing DUS examination. Participants randomized to the control group directly accessed DUS examination, without any practical training. DUS measurements by learners and tutors were recorded and checked for accuracy, according to predefined criteria. Detection of both acoustic windows and accurate DUS assessment was achieved by 83.7% learners of the intervention group while 3.5% only among controls (p < 0.0001). The subcostal view of the diaphragm was correctly identified by 92% and 65% learners in the intervention and control groups, respectively (p < 0.0001) while the apposition zone by 86% and 71% learners, respectively (p = 0.026). An accurate diaphragm displacement (DD) measurement was obtained by 91% and 45% learners in the intervention and control groups, respectively (p < 0.0001) while an accurate thickening fraction (TF) measurement by 99% and 21%, respectively (p < 0.0001). DD measurements by both groups of learners were significantly correlated with those assessed by expert tutors; however, a significant improvement of measurement accuracy was found in learners randomized to receive also the practical training, compared to controls.CONCLUSIONS:A combined approach consisting of a theoretical module followed by a practical training is more effective in managing acoustic windows and performing accurate measurements when compared to an exclusively theoretical course. Trial registration prospectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier: NCT03704129; release date 17th October 2018).

UR - http://hdl.handle.net/10447/377504

M3 - Article

VL - 11

JO - THE ULTRASOUND JOURNAL

JF - THE ULTRASOUND JOURNAL

SN - 2524-8987

ER -