Physicians’ abilities to obtain and interpret focused cardiac ultrasound images from critically ill patients after a 2-day training course

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to determine whether a focused 2-day cardiac ultrasound training course could enable physicians to obtain and interpret focused cardiac ultrasound (FCU) images from critically ill patients. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the FCU images submitted by the physicians who attended a 2-day FCU training courses. Three experienced trainers reviewed the images separately. They determined whether the images were assessable and scored the images on an 8-point scale. They also decided whether the physicians provided correct responses for visual estimations of the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and right ventricle (RV) dilatation and septal motion. Results: Among the 327 physicians, 291 obtained images that were considered assessable (89%). The scores for parasternal short-axis view were lower than those obtained for other transthoracic echocardiographic views, p < 0.001. More physicians provided incorrect appraisals of LVEF than of RV dilatation and septal motion (19.9% vs. 3.1%, p < 0.001). The percentages of incorrect answers by LVEF category were as follows: 34.8% on images of LVEF < 30, 24.7% on images of LVEF 30-54, and 16.4% on images of LVEF ≥55%, p < 0.001. A logistic regression analysis showed that patients with abnormal LVEF were associated with physicians' incorrect assessment of LVEF, with an odds ratio of 1.923 (95% confidence interval (CI):1.071-3.456, p = 0.029). Conclusions: A large proportion of physicians could obtain and interpret FCU images from critically ill patients after a 2-day training course. However, they still scored low on the parasternal short-axis view and were more likely to make an incorrect assessment of LVEF in patients with abnormal left ventricular systolic function.

Assessing a novel critical care ultrasonography training program for intensive care unit nurses in China

“…Our CCUS nurse training program was based on previous ultrasound training [ 4 ] and has several key advantages. First, the training was practical and novel.…”

“…These various methods allowed nurses to quickly understand ultrasound theory and work together in groups. [ 4 ] Third, the training evaluation promoted the continuous improvement of training. We conducted knowledge assessment, skills assessment, and 2-month post-course evaluation.…”

“…Second, the teaching styles were diverse, including case study-based learning, problem-based learning, hands-on training, and team-based learning. These various methods allowed nurses to quickly understand ultrasound theory and work together in groups [4] . Third, the training evaluation promoted the continuous improvement of training.…”