The effect of e-learning on point-of-care ultrasound education in novices

Figures & data

Figure 1. The user interfaces at stage 3 of the e-learning platform.

Table 1. The characteristics of the post-graduate year (PGY) residents.

Characteristics	PGY-1^† using e-learning^‡ (n = 70)	PGY-1 without using e-learning (n = 100)	PGY-2 (n = 53)	p-value
Age, years*	26 [26]	26 [26]	27 [27]
Male, n (%)	45 (64%)	73 (73%)	37 (70%)
Prior PoCUS^† experience, scans*	4 [2–5]^a	3 [2–5]^b	26 (21–32)^ab	<0.0001
OSCE^† global rating score*	4 [4,5]	4 [4]	-	<0.0001^§
Sonographic examinations*
Number*	4 [2–6]^c	3 [1–5]^d	2 [1–3]^cd	0.0018
Imaging quality*	3 (3–3.2)^ef	3 (2.9–3)^f	3 (2.7–3)^e	0.0185
Diagnostic accuracy, %*	100 (100)	100 (100)	100 (100)	0.075

*Presented as median (interquartile range, IQR).

^†PoCUS, point-of-care ultrasound; OSCE, Objective Structured Clinical Examination; PGY-1, the first postgraduate year.

^‡Using stage 3 in the e-learning platform.

^§Compared between the PGYs with and without e-learning.

^ap<0.0001.

^bp<0.0001.

^cp = 0.0004.

^dp = 0.0074.

^ep = 0.044.

^fp = 0.015.

Figure 2. The study diagram. PGY, the post-graduate year; OSCE, objective structured clinical examination; FAST, focused assessment of sonography for trauma.

Figure 3. The time of day that the users had the first access to log into the e-learning platform.

Table 2. The user activity and time spent at the first access in different stages of the e-learning platform.

Stages	Accessed residents (n)	Time spent (min)*
Stage 1, Pretest Stage	70	6.5 (4.1–8.2)
Stage 2, Teaching Stage	70	5.6 (3.0–11.7)
Stage 3, Self-Learning Stage	70	3.3 (2.4–4.6)
Stage 4, Self-Testing Stage	25	1.3 (1.0–1.8)
Stage 5, Case-Simulation Stage	21	4.1 (3.8–5.0)

*Presented as median (interquartile range, IQR)

Table 3. The characteristics of the first-year post-graduate year (PGY-1) residents using the e-learning before and after the curriculum.

Characteristics	Before the curriculum (n = 48)	After the curriculum (n = 22)	p-value
Male, n (%)	31 (65%)	14 (64%)
Prior US* experience, n (%)
≤10 scans	44 (92%)	22 (100%)
> 10 scans	4 (8%)	0
OSCE global rating score^†	5 [4,5]	4 [4]	0.001
Sonographic examinations^†
Number^†	4 [1–6]	3 [2–5]
Imaging quality^†	3 (3–3.3)	3 [3]
Diagnostic accuracy, %^†	100 (96.7–100)	100 (100)

*US, ultrasonography; OSCE, Objective Structured Clinical Examination.

^†Presented as median (interquartile ranges, IQRs).

Filippucci E, Meenagh G, Ciapetti A, et al. E-learning in ultrasonography: a web-based approach. Ann Rheum Dis. 2007;66(7):962–965.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Chenkin J, Lee S, Huynh T, et al. Procedures can be learned on the Web: a randomized study of ultrasound-guided vascular access training. Acad Emerg Med. 2008;15(10):949–954.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Fontaine G, Cossette S, Maheu-Cadotte MA, et al. Efficacy of adaptive e-learning for health professionals and students: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2019;9(8):e025252.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Beeson MS, Carter WA, Christopher TA, et al. Emergency medicine milestones. J Grad Med Educ. 2013;5(Suppl 1s1):5–13.

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Lewiss RE, Pearl M, Nomura JT, et al. CORD-AEUS: consensus document for the emergency ultrasound milestone project. Acad Emerg Med. 2013;20(7):740–745.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Nordenholz KE, Rubin MA, Gularte GG, et al. Ultrasound in the evaluation and management of blunt abdominal trauma. Ann Emerg Med. 1997;29(3):357–9.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar