Simulation-Based Training of Ultrasound-Guided Procedures in Radiology - A Systematic Review
Research output: Contribution to journal › Review › Research › peer-review
Standard
Simulation-Based Training of Ultrasound-Guided Procedures in Radiology - A Systematic Review. / Rasmussen, Niklas Kahr; Andersen, Tobias Thostrup; Carlsen, Jonathan; Østergaard, Mia Louise; Konge, Lars; Albrecht-Beste, Elisabeth; Nielsen, Michael Bachmann.
In: Ultraschall in der Medizin, Vol. 40, No. 5, 2019, p. 584-602.Research output: Contribution to journal › Review › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Simulation-Based Training of Ultrasound-Guided Procedures in Radiology - A Systematic Review
AU - Rasmussen, Niklas Kahr
AU - Andersen, Tobias Thostrup
AU - Carlsen, Jonathan
AU - Østergaard, Mia Louise
AU - Konge, Lars
AU - Albrecht-Beste, Elisabeth
AU - Nielsen, Michael Bachmann
PY - 2019
Y1 - 2019
N2 - PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review of the effect of simulation-based training (SBT) of percutaneous abdominal and thoracic ultrasound-guided procedures and to assess the transfer of procedural competence to a clinical context.MATERIALS AND METHODS: This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies assessing procedural competence after SBT. Two authors independently reviewed all studies and extracted data. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool for randomized studies (RoB) and non-randomized studies (ROBINS-I). Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.RESULTS: 42 studies were included. 6 were randomized controlled, 3 non-randomized controlled, and 33 non-randomized non-controlled. 26 studies examined US-guided abdominal procedures, 13 examined thoracic procedures, and 3 examined both. The results favored SBT compared to other educational interventions and found that training was superior to no training. Only two studies examined the transfer of procedural skills to a clinical context. All studies had a high or critical risk of bias. Thus, the quality of evidence for the effect of SBT on procedural competence was low, and evidence for its transfer to a clinical context was very low.CONCLUSION: The evidence supporting SBT of percutaneous abdominal and thoracic US-guided procedures remains insufficient due to methodological problems and a high risk of bias. Future studies should be randomized and single-blinded, use assessment tools supported by validity evidence, compare different educational strategies, and examine the transfer of skills to a clinical setting.
AB - PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review of the effect of simulation-based training (SBT) of percutaneous abdominal and thoracic ultrasound-guided procedures and to assess the transfer of procedural competence to a clinical context.MATERIALS AND METHODS: This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies assessing procedural competence after SBT. Two authors independently reviewed all studies and extracted data. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool for randomized studies (RoB) and non-randomized studies (ROBINS-I). Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.RESULTS: 42 studies were included. 6 were randomized controlled, 3 non-randomized controlled, and 33 non-randomized non-controlled. 26 studies examined US-guided abdominal procedures, 13 examined thoracic procedures, and 3 examined both. The results favored SBT compared to other educational interventions and found that training was superior to no training. Only two studies examined the transfer of procedural skills to a clinical context. All studies had a high or critical risk of bias. Thus, the quality of evidence for the effect of SBT on procedural competence was low, and evidence for its transfer to a clinical context was very low.CONCLUSION: The evidence supporting SBT of percutaneous abdominal and thoracic US-guided procedures remains insufficient due to methodological problems and a high risk of bias. Future studies should be randomized and single-blinded, use assessment tools supported by validity evidence, compare different educational strategies, and examine the transfer of skills to a clinical setting.
KW - Abdomen/diagnostic imaging
KW - Computer Simulation
KW - Humans
KW - Phantoms, Imaging
KW - Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
KW - Thoracic Cavity/diagnostic imaging
KW - Ultrasonography
KW - Ultrasonography, Interventional
U2 - 10.1055/a-0896-2714
DO - 10.1055/a-0896-2714
M3 - Review
C2 - 31083742
VL - 40
SP - 584
EP - 602
JO - Ultraschall in der Medizin
JF - Ultraschall in der Medizin
SN - 0172-4614
IS - 5
ER -
ID: 232975297