Key result
Video clip training boosts visual LVEF interpretation scores ~55% and reduces time vs conventional training.
Why the study?
Does video clip training improve the interpretation ability of visual ejection fraction in emergency medicine residents?
Does video clip training improve the interpretation ability of visual ejection fraction in emergency medicine residents?
Video clip training significantly improves emergency medicine residents' accuracy and speed in visually estimating ejection fraction compared to conventional training.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Video clip training may enhance EM residents' visual EF interpretation; hypothesis-generating and requires larger trials before practice adoption.
Background: Information on cardiac contractility is very important in resuscitation of critically ill patients. However, the measurement of ejection fractions by echocardiography is very difficult to perform for non-cardiologists. We developed a video clip to train emergency medicine residents to measure visual ejection fraction and compared the improvement in their interpretation ability with that following the conventional training method. Objectives: Improvement of interpreting ability of vEF in short period. Methods: A total of 27 multicentre emergency medicine residents were recruited and divided into conventional training group (N = 13) and video clip training group (N = 14). Self-training was done for 1 week. Pre-test and post-test comprising 20 questions were used for evaluation, and scores and interpretation time were recorded. Results: The score of the video clip training group showed a statistically significant improvement in contrast to the conventional training group (the score of pre- and post-test, ±5% scoring method: correct answer; video clip training group, 5.4/20 to 10.4/20 ( p < 0.001) versus conventional training group, 5.8/20 to 6.7/20 ( p = 0.204)). Furthermore, there was a statistically significant reduction in the interpretation time (interpretation time of video clip training group, 417.7–358.8 s ( p = 0.005) versus conventional training group, 416.8–411.5 s ( p = 0. 497)). Conclusion: In the video clip training group, interpretation accuracy improved, and the interpretation time was shorter than that of the conventional training group. Based on these results, we conclude that improvement in the visual ejection fraction interpretation ability by emergency medicine residents can be expected.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yang et al. (2018) studied Interpretation of visual ejection fraction (n=27). Video clip training vs. Conventional training method was evaluated on Visual ejection fraction interpretation score (out of 20) (p=< 0.001). Video clip training significantly improved visual ejection fraction interpretation scores (to 10.4/20 vs 6.7/20) and reduced interpretation time compared to conventional training.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: