Thoracic ultrasound competence for ultrasound guided pleural procedures: The creation and validation of an assessment tool for use in the certification of basic thoracic ultrasound competence.

Clicks: 219
ID: 275058
2022
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Star

Ranked #2 of 2 articles by views in Journal of clinical ultrasound : JCU

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Focused thoracic ultrasound (TUS) provides an increased safety profile when undertaking invasive pleural procedures. This has led to the requirement for defined curricula, high quality teaching and robust, validated assessment tools among physicians to ensure patient safety and clinical excellence. Current UK practice is based almost exclusively on expert consensus, but assessment methods employed have been shown to have low reliability and validity and are potentially open to bias. As a result, several assessment tools have been developed, although each has its own limitations.This study aimed to develop and validate an assessment tool corresponding to those skills associated with the most basic level of practice, defined recently as an emergency level operator in the British Thoracic Society Training Standards for Thoracic Ultrasound.A total of 27 candidates were enrolled by two examiners based in Belfast and Oxford over a 10-month period between February and November 2019. Mean score of the inexperienced group was 44.3 (95% CI 39.2-49.4, range 28-54) compared with 74.9 (95% CI 72.8-77, range 64-80) in the experienced group providing an estimated mean difference of 30.7 between the two groups (95% CI 24.7-36.7; p < .001).This tool appears to discriminate between trainees with limited experience of TUS performance and those with no experience. It has the potential to form part of the assessment strategy for trainees in the United Kingdom and beyond, alongside well established assessment tools in postgraduate training.
Reference Key
mccracken2022thoracicjournal Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors McCracken, David J;Bedawi, Eihab O;Stevenson, Michael;Cullen, Kathy M;Stanton, Andrew E;Rahman, Najib M;
Journal Journal of clinical ultrasound : JCU
Year 2022
DOI
10.1002/jcu.23137
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.