Retenção do conhecimento após treinamento de ultrassonografia cardíaca focada: estudo‐piloto prospectivo de coorte
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A ultrassonografia cardíaca no local de atendimento (USCLA) provou ser importante para orientar o processo de tomada de decisão clínica dos anestesiologistas. Treinar os residentes para fazer e interpretar uma USCLA é viável e eficaz. No entanto, o grau de retenção do conhecimento após o treinamento permanece um assunto de debate. Procuramos fornecer uma descrição do currículo de quatro semanas do treinamento de USCLA e avaliar a retenção do conhecimento entre os residentes de anestesia seis meses após a rotação em USCLA. Uma análise prospectiva foi realizada com 11 residentes seniores de anestesia. Ao final da rotação em USCLA, os participantes preencheram um questionário (avaliando o número de exames ultrassonográficos concluídos, o conhecimento adquirido e o nível de conforto dos residentes com a USCLA) e fizeram um exame de múltipla escolha para USCLA, composto por perguntas escritas e baseadas em vídeo. Seis meses depois, os participantes preencheram um questionário de acompanhamento e um exame similar. A autoavaliação do conhecimento e os escores do exame foram comparados no final da rotação e após seis meses. Correlações de Spearman foram usadas para testar a relação entre o número de exames concluídos e os escores dos exames, o conhecimento percebido, os escores dos exames, o número de exames e o conhecimento percebido. Os escores médios dos exames (50) foram: 44,1 no final da rotação e 43 após seis meses. Os residentes tiveram conhecimento percebido significativamente maior (10) no final da rotação (8,0) que após seis meses (5,5), p = 0,003. No final da rotação, todos os residentes se sentiram confortáveis usando o aparelho de USCLA e, aos seis meses, 10/11 ainda se sentiam confortáveis. Todos os residentes haviam usado o USCLA em sua prática clínica após o final da rotação e a razão mais citada para não usar o USCLA com mais frequência foi a falta de necessidade clínica percebida. Uma correlação forte e estatisticamente significativa (rho = 0,804, p = 0,005) foi observada entre o número de exames realizados durante a rotação em USCLA e o conhecimento percebido em seis meses de seguimento. Quatro semanas de treinamento intensivo de USCLA resultaram em aquisição e retenção adequadas do conhecimento por seis meses. Focused Cardiac Ultrasound (FoCUS) has proven instrumental in guiding anesthesiologists’ clinical decision‐making process. Training residents to perform and interpret FoCUS is both feasible and effective. However, the degree of knowledge retention after FoCUS training remains a subject of debate. We sought to provide a description of our 4‐week FoCUS curriculum, and to assess the knowledge retention among anesthesia residents at 6 months after FoCUS rotation. A prospective analysis involving eleven senior anesthesia residents was carried out. At end of FoCUS Rotation (EOR) participants completed a questionnaire (evaluating the number of scans completed and residents’ self‐rated knowledge and comfort level with FoCUS), and a multiple‐choice FoCUS exam comprised of written‐ and video‐based questions. Six months later, participants completed a follow‐up questionnaire and a similar exam. Self‐rated knowledge and exam scores were compared at EOR and after 6 months. Spearman correlations were conducted to test the relationship between number of scans completed and exam scores, perceived knowledge and exam scores, and number of scans and perceived knowledge. Mean exam scores (out of 50) were 44.1 at EOR and 43 at the 6‐month follow‐up. Residents had significantly higher perceived knowledge (out of 10) at EOR (8.0) than at the 6‐month follow‐up (5.5), p = 0.003. At the EOR, all trainees felt comfortable using FoCUS, and at 6 months 10/11 still felt comfortable. All the trainees had used FoCUS in their clinical practice after EOR, and the most cited reason for not using FoCUS more frequently was the lack of perceived clinical need. A strong and statistically significant (rho = 0.804, p = 0.005) correlation between number of scans completed during the FoCUS rotation and 6‐month follow‐up perceived knowledge was observed. Four weeks of intensive FoCUS training results in adequate knowledge acquisition and 6‐month knowledge retention.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".