EducationComparison of learning outcomes for teaching focused cardiac ultrasound to physicians: A supervised human model course versus an eLearning guided self- directed simulator course
Introduction
Physician-performed focused cardiac ultrasound (FCU) is established in anesthesiology and critical practice [1,2]. The most important barrier to adoption reported by Conlin et al. [1] was lack of training opportunity, who identified a strong need for a scalable teaching process that provides acceptable learning outcomes.
There are three key components to learning a new skill such as FCU – knowledge, practical learning and practice. The traditional initial training model for FCU is a combination of initial knowledge teaching (lectures or eLearning) followed by a supervised workshop of ultrasound on healthy human volunteers. Unfortunately, the initial practical training is dependent on close supervision by trainers, which significantly limits the upward scalability of FCU teaching programs to cope with the increasing demand.
Ultrasound simulators have evolved to be highly sophisticated and realistic, with a recently developed advantage of showing pathology during the initial learning phase, enabling both learning of image acquisition as well as interpretation and reporting. Simulators have been demonstrated to be effective in substitution of human volunteers in initial learning of acquisition of normal FCU views [3], but expansion in training is still restricted by the use of instructors for supervision and also of teaching interpretation of pathology.
The University of Melbourne has developed a course that uses a simulator (Vimedix™, CAE Healthcare, Montreal, Canada) that displays pathology to be almost entirely self-directed (FCU TTE Course [4]), reducing the restriction of trainers to expand the teaching FCU. The supervised teaching of acquisition of normal views is reduced to 3-h using a simulator, after which training of acquiring normal views and interpretation of pathology is entirely self-directed practice with the simulators. By reducing the dependence of training on instructors, the simulator course is much more efficient, enabling an increased volume of training. The evidence gap is whether the learning outcomes of the simulator course are as good as the supervised human model. The aim of this study was to compare the simulator-based training course to a traditional model of a supervised workshop with human models for image acquisition and interpretive skills.
Section snippets
Materials and methods
This prospective observational non-randomized comparative study was approved by The University of Melbourne Human Research Ethics Committee (144321) prior to the commencement of the study period. Written consent was obtained from all participants.
At the commencement of the study period, participants enrolled in either the traditional human model methods course (iHeartScan™ course [5]) or the self-directed simulator course (FCU TTE course [4]) were invited to participate in the study. It was not
Results
Between March 1st 2015 and 18thth January 2017 a convenience sample of 161 participants were enrolled into the education programs (80 participants in the human model group and 81 participants in the simulator group), who all completed their eLearning. After the eLearning and prior to practical training, 11 participants in simulator group and 6 participants in the traditional group either declined participation in the study or were excluded as they were not able to present for follow up (Table 2
Discussion
This study has demonstrated that the simulator based learning program is non-inferior to the traditional workshop style teaching program utilizing human models for interpretive knowledge and satisfaction, and is superior for image acquisition skills.
The non-inferiority design was used as we were concerned that learning to acquire images on a simulator may not provide equivalent training to acquiring images on humans, as is taught in the traditional course, and as reported in the expert
Conclusion
Interpretive learning outcomes were non-inferior, but image acquisition was superior for self-directed simulator learning of focused cardiac ultrasound compared with supervised human model workshop course. Direct costs, instructor and training time were lower for the simulator course
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge the significant contributions to performing this study from the administrative staff of the Ultrasound Education Group, The University of Melbourne, and statistical advice was given by Dr. Sandy Clarke from The University of Melbourne (Consulting Biostatistician).
Conflict of interest statement
Colin Royse, Alistair Royse and David Canty are employees of the University of Melbourne, and Colin Royse and Alistair Royse are directors of iTeachU limited. Educational content from these entities are available for sale in the United States of America through the American Society of Anesthesiologists and the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiology. The University of Melbourne has received loan equipment from the simulator company CAE.
Funding
This work was supported by a simulation/grant from Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists (S16/002).
References (19)
- et al.
Limited transthoracic echocardiography assessment in anaesthesia and critical care
Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol
(2009) - et al.
Assessment of image Quality of Repeated Limited Transthoracic Echocardiography after Cardiac Surgery
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth
(2017) - et al.
The transthoracic echocardiography and lung ultrasound on diagnosis and management of patients admitted to ICU: A prospective feasibility and impact of routine combined limited observational study
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth
(2018 Feb 1) - et al.
Recommendations for evaluation of the severity of native valvular regurgitation with two-dimensional and Doppler echocardiography
J Am Soc Echocardiogr
(2003) Ultrasound-guided haemodynamic state assessment
Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol
(2009)- et al.
Focused cardiac ultrasound: recommendations from the American Society of Echocardiography
J Am Soc Echocardiogr
(2013) - et al.
An online spaced-education game to teach and assess residents: a multi-institutional prospective trial
J Am Coll Surg
(2012) - et al.
Perioperative use of Focused Transthoracic Cardiac Ultrasound: a survey of Current Practice and Opinion
Anesth Analg
(2017) - et al.
Perioperative ultrasound training in anesthesiology: a call to action
Anesthesia & Analgesia
(2016)