Development of a Three-Dimensionally Printed Ultrasound-Guided Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Phantom

Abstract

IntroductionUltrasound-guided peripheral intravenous catheter (US-PIVC) placement is an effective technique to establish PIV access when the traditional approach fails. Many training programs utilize commercial or homemade phantoms for procedural training. However, commercial products tend to be expensive and lack realism, while homemade blocks tend to be single-use and degrade easily. Thanks to the increasing availability of three-dimensional (3D) printers in academic settings, we sought to design and develop a reusable 3D-printed US-PIVC phantom and to evaluate its utility in terms of time needed to achieve IV placement and perceived realism compared to a commercial model among a group of emergency medicine (EM) physicians. MethodsThe upper extremity vascular phantom was constructed using 3D printing and casting techniques. A convenience sampling of EM physicians was timed by placing a US-PIVC in the 3D-printed and commercial models. Participants were also surveyed to assess their impression of the realism of the models. The primary outcome was the time required for US-PIVC placement in the 3D-printed model compared to the commercial model. Secondary outcomes were the assessment of differences in perceived realism and total cost between the two models. ResultsTwenty-one EM physicians completed the study. There were no significant differences in the mean time (seconds) for US-PIVC placement in the 3D-printed model (31, SD: 21) compared to the commercial model (30, SD: 18), p=0.77. Mean realism score trended higher for the 3D-printed model (3.6, SD: 0.9) compared to the commercial model (3.1, SD: 1.0), p=0.10. The total cost for the 3D-printed model was $120, with the interchangeable replacement part costing $21, which was much cheaper compared to the commercial phantom, which cost $549. ConclusionWe developed a 3D-printed reusable US-PIVC phantom, and it proved to be more economical without sacrificing the realism and time required for US-PIVC placement when compared to a commercial phantom.

Individualized Ultrasound-Guided Intervention Phantom Development, Fabrication, and Proof of Concept*

“…Successful testing in large deep central vessels and shallow superficial peripheral veins demonstrates the adaptability of the phantom fabrication methodology and the translatability of AI-GUIDE to diverse applications. 3D-printing of vascular phantoms has emerged recently as an active area of investigation [7][8][9][10]. Many investigations focus on utilization of custom phantoms to optimize clinical procedural planning or for use in clinician education with excellent effect.…”

State of the art: Simulation in der Ultraschallausbildung

“…Erfahrungen der Simulationsausbildung von Piloten und Chirurgen zeigen jedoch, dass diese den einfachen Phantomen in Abhängigkeit vom Ausbildungsziel nicht zwangsläufig überlegen sein müssen [15,16]. [17,18,19]. Vorteilhaft ist die Nutzung des normalen Ultraschallgerätes, sodass die erforderlichen Techniken zur Bildeinstellung und Bildoptimierung ("Knöpfologie") realistisch geübt werden können.…”

“…Mit ihnen können gezielt einzelne Aspekte trainiert werden ("Part-task-Konzept"). So werden sie vor allem für das Training interventioneller Techniken wie beispielsweise das Legen von Gefäßzugängen oder Organpunktionen genutzt [17,18,19]. Vorteilhaft ist die Nutzung des normalen Ultraschallgerätes, sodass die erforderlichen Techniken zur Bildeinstellung und Bildoptimierung ("Knöpfologie") realistisch geübt werden können.…”

The Role of 3D Printing in Planning Complex Medical Procedures and Training of Medical Professionals—Cross-Sectional Multispecialty Review

“…Similarly, using easy-to-purchase 3D printing components, Lord et al produced a durable pericardiocentesis chest model for less than USD 110 (material costs) [ 144 ]. As for vascular access, Tan et al compared a 3D-printed ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous catheter (US-PIVC) phantom and five times more costly (USD 120 vs. USD 549) commercial model in terms of time to placing a US-PIVC by 21 emergency medicine physicians and found that there was no significant difference in mean time PIVC placement and realism between the two groups [ 145 ]. In another study, Engelbrecht et al found the 3D-printed trainer to be a practical tool for practicing intraosseous techniques among rural medicine residents, rural emergency medicine physicians, and nurses [ 146 ].…”