The resting ankle-brachial index (ABI) is a first-line test to diagnose peripheral artery disease (PAD). No randomized controlled trial (RCT) has yet been conducted to determine the best teaching method to become proficient in the ABI procedure. We conducted a monocentric RCT to determine whether didactic learning alone or didactic learning combined with experiential learning improved proficiency in the ABI procedure. Medical students ( n = 30) received didactic learning, including (i) a presentation of the ABI guidelines and (ii) a video demonstration. Each student was then randomized into two groups ('no experiential learning group' and 'experiential learning group'). An initial evaluation was performed after the didactic learning and a final evaluation at the end of the intervention. A student was considered to be proficient when he or she performed a correct ABI procedure on a healthy individual and a patient. The correct procedure corresponds to (i) following guidelines and (ii) a difference in ABI measurement between a vascular specialist and a student of ≤ 0.15. No student was proficient at the initial evaluation. At the final evaluation, in the didactic learning group, the number of proficient students was not improved compared with the initial evaluation (0/10 vs 1/10). In the experiential learning group, the number of proficient students was significantly improved (0/20 vs 11/20; p < 0.05). At the final evaluation, there was a significant difference between the number of proficient students depending on their learning group. In conclusion, didactic learning alone is insufficient to gain proficiency in the ABI procedure. Combining didactic learning with experiential learning significantly improved the students' proficiency.
Background: The resting ankle-brachial index (ABI) is a clinical test to diagnose peripheral artery disease (PAD). The Wyatt's score has been proposed to assess the students' performance on ABI measurement on a healthy volunteer (HV). No study has shown that this score is sensitive to different teaching methods. In this randomized-controlled-trial, we wanted to determine whether didactic learning alone or didactic learning combined with experiential learning improve proficiency in the ABI procedure assessed by the Wyatt's score. Methods: Medical students (n = 30) received a didactic learning, including i) a presentation of the ABI guidelines and ii) a video demonstration. Each student, was then randomized into two groups ("the no experiential learning group" and "the experiential learning group"). An initial evaluation was performed after the didactic learning and then the final evaluation at the end of the intervention. A student was considered to be proficient when he performed a correct ABI procedure on a HV. The correct procedure corresponds to: i) correctly answered Wyatt's score and ii) a difference of an ABI measurement between a professor in vascular medicine and a student ≤0.15. Results: No student was proficient at the initial evaluation. At the final evaluation, there was a significant difference between the number of proficient students for the Wyatt's score depending on their learning group (didactic alone (1/10) or didactic + experiential training (15/20)) and also for the ABI procedure (didactic alone (0/10) or didactic + experiential training (16/20)). At month-6, among the twelve students who passed the final evaluation, four passed both the Wyatt's score and the ABI measurement. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates that the Wyatt's score was sensitive to an educational intervention and no improvement was found in the case of no experiential learning. The Wyatt's score could be used to evaluate student on ABI measurement after an educational intervention.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.