走（社交）的距离：比较在线与面对面的颈内静脉中央导管置管术程序培训的效果。
Going the (social) distance: Comparing the effectiveness of online versus in-person Internal Jugular Central Venous Catheterization procedural training.
机构信息
Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering, Penn State, University Park, PA, 16802, USA.
Department of Surgery, Penn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, 17033, USA.
出版信息
Am J Surg. 2022 Sep;224(3):903-907. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2021.12.006. Epub 2021 Dec 7.
BACKGROUND
This study compares surgical residents' knowledge acquisition of ultrasound-guided Internal Jugular Central Venous Catheterization (US-IJCVC) between in-person and online procedural training cohorts before receiving independent in-person Dynamic Haptic Robotic Simulation training.
METHODS
Three surgical residency procedural training cohorts, two in-person (N = 26) and one online (N = 14), were compared based on their performance on a 24-item US-IJCVC evaluation checklist completed by an expert physician completed after training. Pre- and post-training US-IJCVC knowledge was also compared for the online cohort.
RESULTS
No significant change in the pass rates on the US-IJCVC checklist was found between in-person and online cohorts (p = 0.208). There were differences in the Economy of Time and Motion between in-person and online cohorts (p < 0.005). The online cohort had significant increases in US-IJCVC knowledge pre-to post-training (p < 0.008).
CONCLUSION
Online training with independent simulation practice was as effective as in-person training for US-IJCVC.
背景
本研究比较了在接受独立的动态触觉机器人模拟培训之前，接受过超声引导下颈内静脉中央导管置管术（US-IJCVC）的现场和在线程序培训的外科住院医师的知识获取情况。
方法
根据专家医生在培训后完成的 24 项 US-IJCVC 评估检查表上的表现，比较了三个外科住院医师程序培训队列，两个现场队列（N=26）和一个在线队列（N=14）。还比较了在线队列的 US-IJCVC 知识的培训前后情况。
结果
现场和在线队列在 US-IJCVC 检查表上的通过率没有显著差异（p=0.208）。在时间和动作的经济性方面，现场和在线队列之间存在差异（p<0.005）。在线队列在 US-IJCVC 知识方面的培训前后有显著增加（p<0.008）。
结论
具有独立模拟实践的在线培训对于 US-IJCVC 与现场培训一样有效。
Zotero 插件