Dataset Information

Teaching ultrasound-guided peripheral venous catheter placement through immersive virtual reality: An explorative pilot study.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Immersive virtual reality (IVR)-based training is gaining ground as an educational tool in healthcare. When combined with well-established educational methods, IVR can potentially increase competency and autonomy in ultrasound (US)-guided peripheral venous cannulation.The aim of this study was to examine the impact of adding IVR training to a course in US-guided peripheral venous cannulation.

Methods

Medical students (n = 19) from the University of Southern Denmark with no former standardized US education were recruited to voluntarily participate in a pilot study, designed as a randomized controlled trial. The primary outcome was the proportion of successful peripheral venous cannulations on a phantom. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of surface punctures on the phantom and procedure time. Participants received e-learning on the basic US before randomization to either IVR (n = 10) or no further training (n = 9). The additional IVR training comprised 10 virtual scenarios for US-guided peripheral venous catheter (PVC) placement. Students were subsequently evaluated in peripheral venous cannulation by a blinded assessor.

Results

The proportion of successful peripheral venous cannulations was significantly higher in the IVR group (P ≤ .001). The proportions of successful cannulations were significantly higher in the IVR group compared to the control group for the 1st and 2nd PVC (P = .011, P = .023), but not for the 3rd PVC (P = .087). Similar results were found for the proportion of surface punctures (1st: P ≤ .001, 2nd: P = .001, and 3rd: P = .114). No significant differences in procedure times were found between the groups.

Conclusion

This pilot study showed that adding an IVR-based training simulation to an existing e-learning curriculum significantly increased the learning efficacy of US-guided PVC placement for medical students.

SUBMITTER: Andersen NL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8270624 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveEmerging evidence suggests that chest radiography (CXR) following central venous catheter (CVC) placement is unnecessary when point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is used to confirm catheter position and exclude pneumothorax. However, few providers have adopted this practice, and it is unknown what contributing factors may play a role in this lack of adoption, such as ultrasound experience. The objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of POCUS to confirm CVC position and exclude a pneumothorax after brief education and training of nonexperts.MethodsWe performed a prospective cohort study in a single academic medical center to determine the diagnostic characteristics of a POCUS-guided CVC confirmation protocol after brief training performed by POCUS nonexperts. POCUS nonexperts (emergency medicine senior residents and critical care fellows) independently performed a POCUS-guided CVC confirmation protocol after a 30-minute didactic training. The primary outcome was the diagnostic accuracy of the POCUS-guided CVC confirmation protocol for malposition and pneumothorax detection. Secondary outcomes were efficiency and feasibility of adequate image acquisition, adjudicated by POCUS experts.ResultsTwenty-six POCUS nonexperts collected data on 190 patients in the final analysis. There were five (2.5%) CVC malpositions and six (3%) pneumothoraxes on CXR. The positive likelihood ratios of POCUS for malposition detection and pneumothorax were 12.33 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.26 to 46.69) and 3.41 (95% CI = 0.51 to 22.76), respectively. The accuracy of POCUS for pneumothorax detection compared to CXR was 0.93 (95% CI = 0.88 to 0.96) and the sensitivity was 0.17 (95% CI = 0.00 to 0.64). The median (interquartile range) time for CVC confirmation was lower for POCUS (9 minutes [8.5-9.5 minutes]) compared to CXR (29 minutes [1-269 minutes]; Mann-Whitney U, p < 0.01). Adequate protocol image acquisition was achieved in 76% of the patients.ConclusionThirty-minute training of POCUS in nonexperts demonstrates adequate diagnostic accuracy, efficiency, and feasibility of POCUS-guided CVC position confirmation, but not exclusion of pneumothorax.

Project description:ImportanceThe inclusion of digital therapeutics (eg, virtual reality [VR] systems) for the management of pain and anxiety associated with routine acutely painful medical procedures may have a substantial impact on treatment adherence and improve long-term health outcomes among young patients.ObjectiveTo determine whether a VR intervention decreases pain and anxiety among patients undergoing peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) placement compared with standard care in the pediatric setting.Design, setting, and participantsThis randomized clinical trial was conducted from April 12, 2017, to July 24, 2019, among 107 patients aged 10 to 21 years who were undergoing PIVC placement in 2 clinical settings (a radiology department and an infusion center) at an urban pediatric academic medical center in the US. Patients, caregivers, and clinicians completed pre-PIVC and post-PIVC placement questionnaires measuring patient pain, anxiety, and anxiety sensitivity; only participants with complete data from before and after PIVC placment were included in the analyses.InterventionsPatients were randomized to receive standard care (simple distraction techniques [eg, music, coloring, singing, and talking] and the application of numbing cream) or a VR intervention using a balanced computer-generated randomization scheme stratified by sex. All patients who received the VR intervention were offered concurrent standard care; however, VR plus standard care was not specifically examined.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcomes were patient pain (measured by the Faces Pain Scale-Revised) and anxiety (measured by a visual analogue scale) reported by the patient, caregiver, and clinician after PIVC placement. Outcomes were analyzed using generalized linear modeling with backward stepwise selection for final model building.ResultsA total of 107 patients (median age, 14.7 years [interquartile range, 12.8-16.9 years]; 63 male participants [58.9%]) completed the clinical trial; 54 patients received standard care, and 53 patients also received the VR intervention. Patients who received the VR intervention compared with standard care had significantly lower mean post-PIVC anxiety scores when patient-reported (1.85 points [95% CI, 1.28-2.41 points] vs 3.14 points [95% CI, 2.59-3.68 points]; P < .001) and clinician-reported (2.04 points [95% CI, 1.37-2.71 points] vs 3.34 points [95% CI, 2.69-3.99 points]; P = .002). Patients in the VR group vs the standard care group also had significantly lower mean post-PIVC pain scores when patient-reported (1.34 points [95% CI, 0.63-2.05 points] vs 2.54 points [95% CI, 1.78-3.30 points]; P = .002), caregiver-reported (1.87 points [95% CI, 0.99-2.76 points] vs 3.01 points [95% CI. 1.98-4.03 points]; P = .04), and clinician-reported (2.05 points [95% CI, 1.47-2.63 points] vs 3.59 points [95% CI, 2.97-4.22 points]; P < .001). Aside from lower levels of baseline pain and anxiety, no demographic variables among patients in the VR group were associated with lower levels of post-PIVC pain and anxiety.Conclusions and relevanceIn this randomized clinical trial, patients undergoing PIVC placement who received a VR intervention experienced significantly less anxiety and pain compared with those who received standard care. The use of patient, caregiver, and clinician data provided a variety of subjective information, as well as observable and objective data regarding perceived pain and anxiety beyond patient reporting alone.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: CHLA-15-00549.

Project description:Background Cost-effective methods to facilitate practical medical education are in high demand and the “mixed-reality” (MR) technology seems suitable to provide students with instructions when learning a new practical task. To evaluate a step-by-step mixed reality (MR) guidance system for instructing a practical medical procedure, we conducted a randomized, single-blinded prospective trial on medical students learning bladder catheter placement. Methods We enrolled 164 medical students. Students were randomized into 2 groups and received instructions on how to perform bladder catheter placement on a male catheterization training model. One group (107 students) were given their instructions by an instructor, while the other group (57 students) were instructed via an MR guidance system using a Microsoft HoloLens. Both groups did hands on training. A standardized questionnaire covering previous knowledge, interest in modern technologies and a self-evaluation was filled out. In addition, students were asked to evaluate the system’s usability. We assessed both groups’s learning outcome via a standardized OSCE (objective structured clinical examination). Results Our evaluation of the learning outcome revealed an average point value of 19.96?±?2,42 for the control group and 21.49?±?2.27 for the MR group - the MR group’s result was significantly better (p?=?0.00). The self-evaluations revealed no difference between groups, however, the control group gave higher ratings when evaluating the quality of instructions. The MR system’s assessment showed less usability, with a cumulative SUS (system usability scale) score of 56.6 (lower half) as well as a cumulative score of 24.2?±?7.3 (n?=?52) out of 100 in the NASA task load index. Conclusions MR is a promising tool for instructing practical skills, and has the potential to enable superior learning outcomes. Advances in MR technology are necessary to improve the usability of current systems. Trial registration German Clinical Trial Register ID: DRKS00013186