Suppr超能文献

血管通路:超声引导与超声手电筒及传统超声在模型中的比较。

Vascular access: comparison of US guidance with the sonic flashlight and conventional US in phantoms.

作者信息

Chang Wilson M, Amesur Nikhil B, Klatzky Roberta L, Zajko Albert B, Stetten George D

机构信息

Department of Bioengineering, University of Pittsburgh, 749 Benedum Hall, Pittsburgh, PA 15261, USA.

出版信息

Radiology. 2006 Dec;241(3):771-9. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2413051595.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To prospectively evaluate whether ultrasonography (US)-guided vascular access can be learned and performed faster with the sonic flashlight than with conventional US and to demonstrate sonic flashlight-guided vascular access in a cadaver.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Institutional review board approval and oral and written informed consent were obtained. The sonic flashlight replaces the standard US monitor with a real-time US image that appears to float beneath the skin and is displayed where it is scanned. In studies 1 and 2, participants performed sonic flashlight-guided needle insertion tasks in vascular phantoms. In study 1, 16 participants (nine women, seven men) with no US experience performed 60 simulated vascular access trials with sonic flashlight or conventional US guidance. With analysis of variance (ANOVA) and power-curve fitting, improvement with practice rate and mean differences between techniques and tasks were examined. In study 2, 14 female nurses (mean age, 50.1 years) proficient with conventional US performed simulated vascular access trials on three tasks with the sonic flashlight and conventional US. With random assignment, half the participants used the sonic flashlight first and half used conventional US first. Mean performance with each technique and that with each task were compared by using ANOVA. In study 3, feasibility of sonic flashlight guidance for access to internal jugular and basilic veins was demonstrated in a cadaver.

RESULTS

For study 1, learning rates (ie, decrease in access time over trials) did not differ for vascular access with sonic flashlight and conventional US. Overall, participants achieved faster vascular access times with sonic flashlight guidance (P < .007). In study 2, participants performed procedures faster overall with the sonic flashlight (P < .02) and found the sonic flashlight easier to use. In study 3, sonic flashlight-guided vascular access was gained in the cadaver.

CONCLUSION

Learning and performance of vascular access were significantly faster with the sonic flashlight than with conventional US, and vascular access could be gained in a cadaver; the sonic flashlight is ready for clinical trials.

摘要

目的

前瞻性评估与传统超声相比,使用超声手电筒进行超声(US)引导下的血管穿刺能否更快地学会并完成,并在尸体上演示超声手电筒引导下的血管穿刺。

材料与方法

获得机构审查委员会批准以及口头和书面知情同意。超声手电筒用实时超声图像取代了标准超声监视器,该图像似乎漂浮在皮肤下方并显示在扫描部位。在研究1和2中,参与者在血管模型上执行超声手电筒引导的针刺任务。在研究1中,16名无超声经验的参与者(9名女性,7名男性)在超声手电筒或传统超声引导下进行了60次模拟血管穿刺试验。通过方差分析(ANOVA)和功率曲线拟合,研究了练习率的提高以及技术和任务之间的平均差异。在研究2中,14名熟练掌握传统超声的女护士(平均年龄50.1岁)在三项任务中使用超声手电筒和传统超声进行模拟血管穿刺试验。通过随机分配,一半参与者先使用超声手电筒,一半参与者先使用传统超声。使用ANOVA比较每种技术和每项任务的平均表现。在研究3中,在尸体上证明了超声手电筒引导下进入颈内静脉和贵要静脉的可行性。

结果

对于研究1,超声手电筒引导和传统超声引导下的血管穿刺学习率(即穿刺时间随试验次数的减少)没有差异。总体而言,参与者在超声手电筒引导下实现了更快的血管穿刺时间(P <.007)。在研究2中,参与者总体上使用超声手电筒执行操作更快(P <.02),并且发现超声手电筒更易于使用。在研究3中,在尸体上成功进行了超声手电筒引导下的血管穿刺。

结论

与传统超声相比,使用超声手电筒进行血管穿刺的学习和操作明显更快,并且可以在尸体上进行血管穿刺;超声手电筒已准备好进行临床试验。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验