Implementation of the modified four‐step approach method for teaching echocardiography using the FATE protocol—A pilot study

Abstract

IntroductionPeyton's four‐step approach is well‐known and commonly used in medical education. It is a practical and useful method which is simple to apply. The study presents the implementation of the modified four‐step approach method to teach how to perform the emergency echocardiographic assessment according to FATE (Focus‐Assessed Transthoracic Echo) protocol. The aim of the study was to determine the feasibility and utility of this method FATE protocol teaching.DesignWe collected students' feedback relating to perception of this way of teaching. Based on a semistructured interview conducted with the students, as well as an evaluation of the electronic survey, it has been demonstrated that the four‐step method is useful for teaching emergency echocardiographic assessment.SettingOne Polish medical school.ParticipantsThe classes were run in small groups as part of an elective ultrasound course for the fourth‐ and fifth‐year students of the Faculty of Medicine of the Medical College. Twenty‐two students were trained.ResultsBased on the opinions of the participants of the elective course and the teacher conducting the classes, which involved the use of the modified Peyton's four‐step method in teaching echocardiography in emergency cases according to the FATE protocol, it has been determined that the four‐step method is effective in imaging training. All participants claim that this method is clear and understandable. Advantages of the methodological approach: a slow‐motion demonstration by the instructor, accompanied by the commentary on the activities undertaken and practical exercises performed by the participants, learning through repetition, requirement of constant concentration.ConclusionsPeyton's approach allows to use of the class time in maximal extend by consolidating new information and facilitating memorization through adequate instructor guidance and observation of the training of the peer students and repetition of the skills acquired.

The Role of Deconstructive Teaching in the Training of Laparoscopy

“…19 Skrzypek et al proved that the 4-step approach can maximize the efficiency of training of a more complex procedure in a class setting. 14…”

“…The 4-step approach has been shown to maximize consolidating new information and improve memorization through adequate instructor guidance in complex skills, which, however, do not require motor coordination, such as in echocardiography training. 14 Additionally, the feasibility and practicability of this model have been validated in the teaching of different skills. 15–17 In other, simpler model-trained procedures such as the external chest compression Peyton method did not seem to be beneficial.…”

The effectiveness of the Peyton’s 4-step teaching approach on skill acquisition of procedures in health professions education: A systematic review and meta-analysis with integrated meta-regression

“…In this phase of the selection process 405 records were excluded. The full-texts of the remaining 37 records were assessed for eligibility and 23 records were excluded with the following reasons: 12 records reported an intervention, which was not eligible for inclusion ( Bode et al, 2012 ; Bube, Konge & Hansen, 2017 ; Craven et al, 2018 ; Custers et al, 1999 ; Handley & Handley, 1998 ; Hill et al, 2010 ; Holmes et al, 1998 ; Krautter et al, 2015 ; Liu & Hunt, 2017 ; Velmahos et al, 2004 ; Wirth et al, 2018 ; Yoganathan et al, 2018 ); 8 records used a study design, which was not eligible for inclusion ( Easton, Stratford-Martin & Atherton, 2012 ; Mishra & Dornan, 2003 ; Nikendei et al, 2014 ; Schroder et al, 2017 ; Skrzypek et al, 2018 ; Smith et al, 2019 ; Sopka et al, 2012 ; Tommaso, 2016 ); 2 records were excluded because of missing data ( Archer, Van Hoving & De Villiers, 2015 ; Seymour-Walsh et al, 2015 ) and 1 record did not use the specified primary outcome assessment for procedural skills ( Greif et al, 2010 ). Finally, 14 studies were included into this systematic review.…”

Peer Review #2 of "The effectiveness of the Peyton’s 4-step teaching approach on skill acquisition of procedures in health professions education: A systematic review and meta-analysis with integrated meta-regression (v0.1)"

“…In this phase of the selection process 405 records were excluded. The full-texts of the remaining 37 records were assessed for eligibility and 23 records were excluded with the following reasons: 12 records reported an intervention, which was not eligible for inclusion (Bode et al 2012;Bube et al 2017;Craven et al 2018;Custers et al 1999;Handley & Handley 1998;Hill et al 2010;Holmes et al 1998;Krautter et al 2015;Liu & Hunt 2017;Velmahos et al 2004;Wirth et al 2018;Yoganathan et al 2018); 8 records used a study design, which was not eligible for inclusion (Easton et al 2012;Mishra & Dornan 2003;Nikendei et al 2014;Schroder et al 2017;Skrzypek et al 2018;Smith et al 2019;Sopka et al 2012;Tommaso 2016); 2 records were excluded because of missing data (Archer et al 2015;Seymour-Walsh et al 2015) and 1 record did not use the specified primary outcome assessment for procedural skills (Greif et al 2010). Finally, 14 studies were included into this systematic review.…”