The ultrasound use of simulators, current view, and perspectives: Requirements and technical aspects (WFUMB state of the art paper)

Simulation has been shown to improve clinical learning outcomes, speed up the learning process and improve learner confidence, whilst initially taking pressure off busy clinical lists. The World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (WFUMB) state of the art paper on the use of simulators in ultrasound education introduces ultrasound simulation, its advantages and challenges. It describes different simulator types, including low and high-fidelity simulators, the requirements and technical aspects of simulators, followed by the clinical applications of ultrasound simulation. The paper discusses the role of ultrasound simulation in ultrasound clinical training, referencing established literature. Requirements for successful ultrasound simulation acceptance into educational structures are explored. Despite being in its infancy, ultrasound simulation already offers a wide range of training opportunities and likely holds the key to a broader point of care ultrasound education for medical students, practicing doctors, and other health care professionals. Despite the drawbacks of simulation, there are also many advantages, which are expanding rapidly as the technology evolves

Consensus on technical procedures in radiology to include in simulation-based training for residents: a European-wide needs assessment

Objectives: To identify and prioritize technical procedures for simulation-based training that should be part of the education of residents in radiology. Methods: This European-wide needs assessment study used a modified Delphi technique to gather consensus from different key education stakeholders in the field. The first round was a brainstorming phase to identify all procedures that a newly specialized radiologist should potentially be able to do. In the second round, each procedure was explored for the need for simulation training; the participants determined frequency, number of radiologists performing the procedure, impact on patient comfort and safety, and feasibility of simulation. The result of this round was sent back to the participants for final evaluation and prioritization. Results: Seventy-one key education stakeholders from 27 European countries agreed to participate and were actively involved in the Delphi process: response rates were 72% and 82% in the second and third round, respectively. From 831 suggested procedures in the first round, these were grouped and categorized into 34 procedures that were pre-prioritized in the second round according to the need for simulation-based training. In the third round, 8 procedures were eliminated resulting in final inclusion of 26 procedures. Ultrasound procedures were highly ranked including basic skills such as probe handling; abdominal ultrasound; and ultrasound of kidneys, retroperitoneum, intestines, and scrotum. Conclusion: The prioritized list of procedures represents a consensus document decided upon by educational stakeholders in radiology across Europe. These procedures are suitable for simulation and should be an integral part of the education of radiologists. Key Points: • The 26 identified procedures are listed according to priority and should be included as an integral part of simulation-based training curricula of radiologists across Europe. • This needs assessment is only the first step towards developing standardized simulation-based training programs that support the harmonization of education and training across Europe

Consensus on Training and Assessment of Competence in Performing Chorionic Villus Sampling and Amniocentesis: An International Delphi Survey

Introduction: The aim of this study was to obtain expert consensus on the content of a curriculum for learning chorionic villus sampling (CVS) and amniocentesis (AC) and the items of an assessment tool to evaluate CVS and AC competence. Methods: We used a 3-round iterative Delphi process. A steering committee supervised all processes. Seven international collaborators were identified to expand the breadth of the study internationally. The collaborators invited fetal medicine experts to participate as panelists. In the first round, the panelists suggested content for a CVS/AC curriculum and an assessment tool. The steering committee organized and condensed the suggested items and presented them to the panelists in round 2. In the second round, the panelists rated and commented on the suggested items. The results were processed by the steering committee and presented to the panelists in the third round, where final consensus was obtained. Consensus was defined as support by more than 80% of the panelists for an item. Results: Eighty-six experts agreed to participate in the study. The panelists represented 16 countries across 4 continents. The final list of curricular content included 12 theoretical and practical items. The final assessment tool included 11 items, systematically divided into 5 categories: pre-procedure, procedure, post-procedure, nontechnical skills, and overall performance. These items were provided with behavioral scale anchors to rate performance, and an entrustment scale was used for the final overall assessment. Conclusion: We established consensus among international fetal medicine experts on content to be included in a CVS/AC curriculum and on an assessment tool to evaluate CVS/AC skills. These results are important to help transition current training and assessment methods from a time- and volume-based approach to a competency-based approach which is a key step in improving patient safety and outcomes for the 2 most common invasive procedures in fetal medicine. Research into fetal development and medicin

Determining procedures for simulation-based training in radiology: a nationwide needs assessment

Objectives: New training modalities such as simulation are widely accepted in radiology; however, development of effective simulation-based training programs is challenging. They are often unstructured and based on convenience or coincidence. The study objective was to perform a nationwide needs assessment to identify and prioritize technical procedures that should be included in a simulation-based curriculum. Methods: A needs assessment using the Delphi method was completed among 91 key leaders in radiology. Round 1 identified technical procedures that radiologists should learn. Round 2 explored frequency of procedure, number of radiologists performing the procedure, risk and/or discomfort for patients, and feasibility for simulation. Round 3 was elimination and prioritization of procedures. Results: Response rates were 67 %, 70 % and 66 %, respectively. In Round 1, 22 technical procedures were included. Round 2 resulted in pre-prioritization of procedures. In round 3, 13 procedures were included in the final prioritized list. The three highly prioritized procedures were ultrasound-guided (US) histological biopsy and fine-needle aspiration, US-guided needle puncture and catheter drainage, and basic abdominal ultrasound. Conclusion: A needs assessment identified and prioritized 13 technical procedures to include in a simulation-based curriculum. The list may be used as guide for development of training programs. Key Points: • Simulation-based training can supplement training on patients in radiology.• Development of simulation-based training should follow a structured approach.• The CAMES Needs Assessment Formula explores needs for simulation training.• A national Delphi study identified and prioritized procedures suitable for simulation training.• The prioritized list serves as guide for development of courses in radiology.</p

European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) Certification of Theoretical and Practical Competences in Basic Vascular Ultrasound: Validity Investigation of the Assessment Tools

Objective: The aim of this study was to gather validity evidence for the Assessment of basic Vascular Ultrasound Expertise (AVAUSE) tool, and to establish a pass/fail score for each component, to support decisions for certification. Methods: A cross sectional validation study performed during the European Society for Vascular Surgery’s annual meeting.Validity evidence was sought for the theoretical test and two practical tests based on Messick’s framework. The participants were vascular surgeons, vascular surgical trainees, sonographers, and nurses with varying experience levels. Five vascular ultrasound experts developed the theoretical and two practical test components of the AVAUSE tool for each test component. Two stations were set up for carotid examinations and two for superficial venous incompetence (SVI) examinations. Eight raters were assigned in pairs to each station. Three methods were used to set pass/fail scores: contrasting groups’ method; rater consensus; and extended Angoff. Results: Nineteen participants were enrolled. Acceptable internal consistency reliability (Cronbach’s alpha) for the AVAUSE theoretical (0.93), carotid (0.84), and SVI (0.65) practical test were shown. In the carotid examination, inter-rater reliability (IRR) for the two rater pairs was good: 0.68 and 0.78, respectively. The carotid scores correlated significantly with years of experience (Pearson’s r 1⁄4 0.56, p 1⁄4 .013) but not with number of examinations in the last five years. For SVI, IRR was excellent at 0.81 and 0.87. SVI performance scores did not correlate with years of experience and number of examinations. The pass/fail score set by the contrasting groups’ method was 29 points out of 50. The rater set pass/fail scores were 3.0 points for both carotid and SVI examinations and were used to determine successful participants. Ten of 19 participants passed the tests and were certified. Conclusion: Validity evidence was sought and established for the AVAUSE comprehensive tool, including pass/fail standards. AVAUSE can be used to assess competences in basic vascular ultrasound, allowing operators to progress towards independent practice