Use of Hand‐motion Analysis to Assess Competence and Skill Decay for Cardiac and Lung Point‐of‐care Ultrasound
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVES: Assessment of competence in technical skills, including point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS), is required before a novice can safely perform the skill independently. Ongoing assessment of competence is also required because technical skills degrade over time, especially when they are infrequently performed or complex. Hand-motion analysis (HMA) is an objective assessment tool that has been used to evaluate competency in many technical skills. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate the feasibility and validity of HMA as an assessment tool for competence in both simple and complex technical skills as well as skill degradation over time. METHODS: This prospective cohort study included 36 paramedics with no POCUS experience and six physicians who were fellowship trained in POCUS. The novices completed a 4-hour didactic and hands-on training program for cardiac and lung POCUS. HMA measurements, objective structured clinical examinations (OSCE), and written examinations were collected for novices immediately before and after training as well as 2 and 4 months after training. Expert HMA metrics were also recorded. RESULTS: Expert HMA metrics for cardiac and lung POCUS were significantly better than those of novices. After completion of the training program, the novices improved significantly in all HMA metrics, knowledge test scores, and OSCE scores. Novices showed skill degradation in cardiac POCUS based on HMA metrics and OSCE scores while lung POCUS image acquisition skills were preserved. Novices deemed competent by OSCE score performed significantly better in HMA metrics than those not deemed competent. CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated that HMA is a feasible and valid tool for assessment of competence in technical skills and can also evaluate skill degradation over time. Skill degradation appears more apparent in complex skills, such as cardiac POCUS. HMA may provide a more efficient and reliable assessment of technical skills, including POCUS, when compared to traditional assessment tools.
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 | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 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 ».