Does Test‐enhanced Learning Improve Success Rates of Ultrasound‐guided Peripheral Intravenous Insertion? A Randomized Controlled Trial
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: Teaching procedural skills in medicine is time- and resource-intensive, and it is therefore important to determine which educational strategies are most effective. Test-enhanced learning (TEL) has been demonstrated to be effective in improving learner retention; however, there is little research evaluating the testing effect on the acquisition of procedural skills in medicine. The objective of this study was to examine the impact of TEL on learning ultrasound-guided intravenous (USG IV) insertion on a simulated model. METHODS: We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial of medical students at a single tertiary care academic hospital. Participants were randomized to either the TEL group (TEG) or control group (CG). Each group received an USG peripheral IV teaching session that included a didactic portion and hands-on skills training. The training sessions were identical except that the TEG was informed at the outset that there would be an assessment at the end of the session. The TEG then received a formal assessment of the skill during the last 15 minutes of the session, whereas the CG had continued practice time. Subjects in both groups were evaluated 10-14 days later to compare skill performance using a simulation-based assessment tool consisting of a global rating scale (GRS) and checklist items. RESULTS: Thirty medical students completed the study, 15 in the TEG and 15 in the CG. There were no significant differences between the two groups at baseline based on year of medical training or prior IV or ultrasound experience. The overall procedural success rate was 93.3% (95% CI = 79.0%-100.0%) in the TEG and 80.0% (95% CI = 57.1%-100%) in the CG (p = 0.60). The first-attempt failure rate was 13.3% (95% CI = 0.0%-32.8%) in the TEG and 33.3% (95% CI = 6.3%-60.4%) in the CG (p = 0.39). There were no statistically significant differences between the means of the GRS (TEG = 4.7, CG = 4.2; p = 0.53, r = 0.11) or checklist scores (TEG = 78.6%, CG = 75.3%; p = 0.20, r = 0.24). CONCLUSIONS: In this study of novice learners, both TEL with structured practice and structured practice alone lead to high success rates performing USG IV insertion on a simulated model. While we noted a trend toward higher procedural success rates and lower first-attempt failure rates in the TEG, these did not meet statistical significance. Further studies with larger sample sizes are required to determine whether the beneficial effects of TEL can be transferred to procedural skills teaching.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,009 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».