Dataset Information

Prospective evaluation of medical student accuracy conducting direct ophthalmoscopy with an unmodified iPhone X.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To evaluate fundus examination accuracy of medical students when using an unmodified iPhone X or a direct ophthalmoscope in comparison to a staff ophthalmologist's retinal examination.

Methods

In this prospective comparative analysis, patients underwent dilated fundus examination by novice medical trainees using either an unmodified iPhone X or standard direct ophthalmoscope. The primary outcome was the mean difference and degree of agreement in cup-to-disc ratio between student examination and the staff ophthalmologist's cup-to-disc observation.

Results

A total of 18 medical students conducted 230 retinal examinations, 117 with the iPhone X and 113 with the direct ophthalmoscope. A greater proportion of students were unable to report cup-to-disc ratio using the iPhone X (81.2%) vs direct ophthalmoscope (30.1%). Student examination of cup-to-disc ratio led to a systematic bias (95% limits of agreement) of + 0.16 (-0.22 to + 0.54) and + 0.10 (-0.36 to + 0.56) with the iPhone X and direct ophthalmoscope, respectively. iPhone X and direct ophthalmoscope student observation concordance for optic disc colour (88.7 and 82.4%, respectively) and contour (68.3 and 74.2%, respectively) demonstrated low agreement with staff ophthalmologist findings. Student iPhone X observations demonstrated lower agreement with staff findings compared to direct ophthalmoscope observations for spontaneous venous pulsations (Cohen's Kappa = -0.044 vs 0.099).

Conclusion

Amongst medical trainees, optic disc visualization using an unmodified iPhone X was inferior to the direct ophthalmoscope. When able to visualize the optic nerve head, there was no significant difference in reported cup-to-disc ratio between modalities. However, both modalities demonstrated poor reliability in comparison to staff ophthalmologist findings.

SUBMITTER: Ahmed Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9308475 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFundus examination is an easy, quick and effective way to diagnose sight- and life-threatening diseases. However, medical students and physicians report lack of proficiency and self-confidence in perform fundoscopy. The aim of this study was to compare students' self-confidence in fundus examination, using two different direct ophthalmoscopes, 1 month and 1 year after practical training.MethodsIn this prospective cohort, medical students (MS) of the same class were divided in small groups for PanOptic (PO) or conventional (CO) direct ophthalmoscope training. The intervention group encompassed MS of the 4th -year (class of 2019), and the control group encompassed MS of year behind (class of 2020). A questionnaire to measure self-confidence in fundoscopy technique assessing optic nerve, cup-to-disc ratio and macula was translated and validated to Portuguese, and applied 1-month and 1-year after practical training.ResultsOne-hundred and sixty-seven MS were enrolled (35 PO group, 38 CO group, and 94 control group). PO group had a significantly higher overall self-confidence comparing either control or CO groups, respectively (3.57 ± 0.65 vs. 2.97 ± 1.03 vs. 2.46 ± 0.87, p < 0.01) as well as in evaluate cup-to-disc ratio (3.09 ± 0.75 vs. 2.32 ± 0.87 vs. 1.46 ± 0.81, p < 0.01), optic disc margins (3.26 ± 0.85 vs. 2.71 ± 0.96 vs. 2.01 ± 0.97, p < 0.01) and macula (3.43 ± 1.12 vs. 2.89 ± 1.08 vs. 2.02 ± 0.89, p < 0.01) 1-month after practical training. One-year after intervention, CO group showed a significantly higher score compared to PO group in overall self-confidence (3.31 ± 0.69 vs. 3.18 ± 0.73, p = 0.03) and in optic disc margins assessing (3.16 ± 0.85 vs. 2.95 ± 0.78, p = 0.03), but not significant in the evaluation of cup-to-disc ratio (2.78 ± 0.97 vs. 2.68 ± 0.94, p = 0.08), and macula (3.34 ± 0.79 vs. 3.27 ± 0.98, p = 0.07).ConclusionsStudents were more confident in use PO as an instrument to perform direct ophthalmoscopy immediately after practical training, but confidence level of CO was higher compared to PO one year after practical training. These findings would help medical schools decide which ophthalmoscope to choose to teach fundus examination.

Project description:PURPOSE:A structured didactic radiation oncology clerkship curriculum for medical students is in use at multiple academic medical centers. Objective evidence supporting this educational approach over the traditional clerkship model is lacking. This study evaluated the curriculum efficacy using an objective knowledge assessment. METHODS AND MATERIALS:Medical students received the Radiation Oncology Education Collaborative Study Group (ROECSG) curriculum consisting of 3 lectures (Overview of Radiation Oncology, Radiation Biology/Physics, and Practical Aspects of Simulation/Radiation Emergencies) and a radiation oncology treatment-planning workshop. A standardized 20-item multiple choice question (MCQ) knowledge assessment was completed pre- and post-curriculum and approximately 6 months after receiving the curriculum. RESULTS:One hundred forty-six students at 22 academic medical centers completed the ROECSG curriculum from July to November 2016. One hundred nine students completed pre- and post-clerkship MCQ knowledge assessments (response rate 74.7%). Twenty-four students reported a prior rotation at a ROECSG institution and were excluded from analysis. Mean assessment scores increased from pre- to post-curriculum (63.9% vs 80.2%, P < .01). Mean MCQ knowledge subdomain assessment scores all improved post-curriculum (t test, P values < .01). Post-scores for students rotating de novo at ROECSG institutions (n = 30) were higher compared with pre-scores for students with ≥1 prior rotations at non-ROECSG institutions (n = 55) (77.3% vs 68.8%, P = .01), with an effect size of 0.8. Students who completed rotations at ROECSG institutions continued to demonstrate a trend toward improved performance on the objective knowledge assessment at approximately 6 months after curriculum exposure (70.5% vs 65.6%, P = .11). CONCLUSIONS:Objective evaluation of a structured didactic curriculum for the radiation oncology clerkship at early and late time points demonstrated significant improvement in radiation oncology knowledge. Students who completed clerkships at ROECSG institutions performed objectively better than students who completed clerkships at non-ROECSG institutions. These results support including a structured didactic curriculum as a standard component of the radiation oncology clerkship.

Project description:IntroductionAlthough emergency medicine (EM) residency program directors (PD) have multiple sources to evaluate each applicant, some programs await the release of the medical student performance evaluation (MSPE) to extend interview offers. While prior studies have demonstrated that MSPE content is variable and selectively positive, no prior work has evaluated the impact of the MSPE on the likelihood to invite (LTI) applicants for a residency interview. This study aimed to evaluate how information in the MSPE impacted LTI, with the hypothesis that changes in LTI would be relatively rare based on MSPE review alone.MethodsWe conducted a prospective, observational study analyzing applications to three EM residency programs during the 2019-2020 match cycle. Reviewers assessed applications and rated the LTI on a five-point Likert scale where LTI was defined as follows: 1 = definitely no; 2 = probably no; 3 = unsure; 4 = probably yes; and 5 = definitely yes. The LTI was recorded before and after MSPE review. A change in LTI was considered meaningful when it changed the overall trajectory of the applicant's likelihood to receive an invitation to interview.ResultsWe reviewed a total of 877 applications with the LTI changing ≥1 point on the Likert scale 160 (18.2%) times. The LTI was meaningfully impacted in a minority of applications - 48 total (5.5 %, p< 0.01) - with only 1 (0.11%) application changing from 1 or 2 (definitely/probably no) to 4 or 5 (probably/definitely yes) and 34 (3.8%) changing from 3 (unsure) to 4 or 5 (probably/definitely yes). Thirteen (1.5%) applications changed from 4 or 5 (probably/definitely yes) to 3 (unsure or probably/definitely no).ConclusionReview of the MSPE resulted in a meaningful change in LTI in only 5.5% of applications. Given the time required for program leadership to review all parts of the variably formatted MSPEs, this finding supports a more efficient application review, where the PD's focus is on succinct and objective aspects of the application, such as the Standardized Letter of Evaluation.