Comparison of Reusable Models in Pericardiocentesis Simulation Training.
10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.2020266
- Author:
Ziwei LIN
1
;
Crystal Harn Wei SOH
;
Mui Teng CHUA
;
Jingping LIN
;
Cheryl Jing Yi HO
;
Julia Ying Hui LEE
;
Fang Yu Tracy SHEN
;
Ying Wei YAU
;
Win Sen KUAN
Author Information
1. Emergency Medicine Department, National University Hospital, National University Health System, Singapore.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- From:Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore
2020;49(12):971-977
- CountrySingapore
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
INTRODUCTION:Pericardiocentesis is a potentially life-saving procedure. We compared two low-cost models-an agar-based model and a novel model, Centesys-in terms of ultrasound image quality and realism, effectiveness of the model, and learners' confidence and satisfaction after training.
METHODS:In this pilot randomised 2x2 crossover trial stratified by physician seniority, participants were assigned to undergo pericardiocentesis training either with the agar-based or Centesys model first, followed by the other model. Participants were asked to rate their confidence in performing ultrasound-guided pericardiocentesis, clarity and realism of cardiac structures on ultrasound imaging, and satisfaction on a 7-point Likert scale before and after training with each model.
RESULTS:Twenty participants with median postgraduate year of 4 (interquartile range [IQR] 3.75-6) years were recruited. Pre-training, participants rated themselves a median score of 2.5 (IQR 2-4) for level of confidence in performing pericardiocentesis, which improved to 5 (IQR 4-6) post-training with Centesys (
CONCLUSION:Centesys achieved greater learner satisfaction as compared to the agar-based model, and was an effective tool for teaching ultrasound-guided pericardiocentesis and drain insertion.
