Le Lous Maela, Klein Margaux, Tesson Caroline, Berthelemy Julien, Lavoue Vincent, Jannin Pierre
Univ Rennes, INSERM, LTSI - UMR 1099, F35000, Rennes, France; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital of Rennes, France; CIC Inserm 1414, University Hospital of Rennes, University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital of Rennes, France.
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2021 Mar;258:16-22. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.12.034. Epub 2020 Dec 29.
Obstetric ultrasound simulators are now used for training and evaluating OB/GYN students but there is a lack of literature about evaluation metrics in this setting. In this literature review, we searched MEDLINE and the COCHRANE database using the keywords: (Obstetric OR Fetal) AND (Sonography OR Ultrasound) AND Simulation. Of a total of 263 studies screened, we selected nine articles from the title and the abstract in PubMed, in the past 5 years. Two more article were added from bibliographies. A total of 11 articles were therefore included. from which nine articles were selected from the title and the abstract in PubMed. Two more articles were added from the bibliographies For each study, data about the type of simulation, and the metrics (qualitative or quantitative) used for assessment were collected. The selection of studies shows that evaluation criteria for ultrasound training were qualitative metrics (binary success/fail exercise ; dexterity quoted by an external observer ; Objective Structured Assessment of Ultrasound Skills (OSAUS) Score ; quality of images according to Salomon's score) or quantitative criteria (Accuracy of Biometry - Simulator generated metrics). Most studies used a combination of both. To date, simulator metrics used to discriminate ultrasound skills are performance score quoted by external observers and image quality scoring. Whether probe trajectory metrics can be used to discriminate skills is unknown.
产科超声模拟器目前用于培训和评估妇产科学生，但在这种情况下缺乏关于评估指标的文献。在这篇文献综述中，我们使用关键词：（产科或胎儿）与（超声检查或超声）与模拟，检索了MEDLINE和COCHRANE数据库。在总共筛选的263项研究中，我们从过去5年PubMed的标题和摘要中选择了9篇文章。从参考文献中又增加了2篇文章。因此总共纳入了11篇文章，其中9篇文章是从PubMed的标题和摘要中选择的。从参考文献中又增加了2篇文章。对于每项研究，收集了关于模拟类型以及用于评估的指标（定性或定量）的数据。研究的选择表明，超声培训的评估标准是定性指标（二元成功/失败练习；外部观察者引用的灵巧性；超声技能客观结构化评估（OSAUS）评分；根据所罗门评分的图像质量）或定量标准（生物测量准确性 - 模拟器生成的指标）。大多数研究同时使用了两者。迄今为止，用于区分超声技能的模拟器指标是外部观察者引用的表现评分和图像质量评分。探头轨迹指标是否可用于区分技能尚不清楚。
