Musculoskeletal Ultrasound and Anatomy: Comment on the Article by Navarro‐Zarza et al

Evangelisto, Amy; Nishio, Miwako; Higgs, Jay B.; Kissin, Eugene Y.; Kaeley, G.

doi:10.1002/acr.22344

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other references to Laënnec link the proliferation of the stethoscope across clinical medicine to the inevitability of a similar proliferation of POCUS . In two texts, authors use the words of Laënnec's English translator (John Forbes) as a parable to ridicule the absurdity of contemporary critics of innovative diagnostic technologies, employing the following quote regarding the future use of the stethoscope: ‘notwithstanding its value, I am extremely doubtful; because its beneficial application requires much time, and gives a good deal of trouble both to the patient and the practitioner’ . This is a partial quote, from the translator's preface to the first edition.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stethoscope of the 21st century: dominant discourses of ultrasound in medical education

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context In recent years, point‐of‐care ultrasound (POCUS) has become a widely used clinical tool in a number of clinical specialties. In response, POCUS has been incorporated into medical curricula across the learning continuum, bolstered by enthusiastic appraisals of the technology's benefits for learners, clinicians and patients. In this project, we have sought to identify and understand the effects of dominant discourses influencing the integration of POCUS into medical education. Methods We conducted a Foucauldian critical discourse analysis (CDA) to identify and analyse discourses that legitimise and privilege the use of POCUS in medical education. We assembled an archive of 473 texts published between 1980 and 2017. Each article in the archive was analysed to identify frequently occurring truth statements (expressing concepts whose truths are unquestioned within particular discourses) that we used to characterise the major discourses that construct representations of POCUS in medical education. Results We identified three dominant discourses: (i) a visuo‐centric discourse prioritising the visual information as truth over other clinical data; (ii) a utilitarian discourse emphasising improvements in patient care; and (iii) a modernist discourse highlighting the current and future needs of clinicians in our technological world. These discourses overlap and converge; the core discursive effect makes the further elevation of POCUS in medical education, and the resulting attenuation of other curricular priorities, appear inevitable. Conclusions The three dominant discourses identified in this paper engender ideal conditions for the proliferation of POCUS in medical education through curricular guidelines, surveys of adherence to these guidelines and authoritative position statements. By identifying and analysing these dominant discourses, we can ask questions that do not take for granted the assumed truths underpinning the discourses, highlight potential pitfalls of proposed curricular changes and ensure these changes truly improve medical education.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stethoscope of the 21st century: dominant discourses of ultrasound in medical education

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Educational impact of a clinical anatomy workshop on 1st-year orthopedic and rheumatology fellows in Mexico City

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We aim to study the educational impact of a clinical anatomy workshop in 1st-year orthopedic and rheumatology fellows. First-year rheumatology fellows (N = 17) and a convenience sample of 1st-year orthopedic fellows (N = 14) from Mexico City in the 9th month of training participated in the study. The pre- and the post- workshop tests included the same 20 questions that had to be answered by identification or demonstration of relevant anatomical items. The questions, arranged by anatomical regions, were asked in five dynamic stations. Overall, the 31 participants showed an increase of correct answers, from a median of 6 (range 1 to 12) in the pre-workshop test, to a median of 14 (range 7 to 19) in the post-workshop test. In the pre-workshop test, the correct median answers were 7 (range 2 to 12) in the orthopedic fellows and 5 (range 1 to 10) in the rheumatology fellows (p = 0.297). Corresponding scores in the post-workshop were 15 (range 10 to 19) and 12 (range 7 to 18) (p = 0.026) showing a significant difference favoring the orthopedic group. Our clinical anatomy workshop was efficacious, in the short term, as a teaching instrument for 1st-year orthopedic and rheumatology fellows. The post-workshop scores, although significantly improved in both groups, particularly in the orthopedic fellows, were still suboptimal. Further refinements of our workshop might yield better results.

show abstract

Musculoskeletal Ultrasound and Anatomy: Comment on the Article by Navarro‐Zarza et al

Cited by 2 publications

References 3 publications

Stethoscope of the 21st century: dominant discourses of ultrasound in medical education

Stethoscope of the 21st century: dominant discourses of ultrasound in medical education

Educational impact of a clinical anatomy workshop on 1st-year orthopedic and rheumatology fellows in Mexico City

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About