Abstract
Purpose: Point-of-care ultrasound using a pocket-ultrasound-device (PUD) is increasing in clinical medicine but the optimal way to teach focused cardiac ultrasound is not clear. We evaluated whether teaching using a PUD or a conventional-ultrasound-device (CUD) is different when the final exam was conducted on a PUD. The primary aim was to compare the weighted total quality scale (WTQS, out of 100) obtained by participants in the two groups (CUD and PUD) on a live volunteer 2-4 weeks after their initial training. The secondary aims were to compare examination time and students' confidence levels (out of 50).Methods: This bicentric, prospective single-blind randomized trial included undergraduate medical students. After watching a 15 min video about echocardiography views, students had a 45 min hands-on training session with a live volunteer using a PUD or a CUD. The final examination was conducted with a PUD on a live volunteer.Results: Eighty-six comparable students were included, with 4 ± 1 years of medical training. In the PUD group, the mean WTQS was 65 ± 16 versus 60 ± 15 in the CUD group [p = 0.22; in multivariate analysis, OR 0.8 95% CI (0.1;1.6), p = 0.34]. The examination time was 10.0 [6.2-12.4] min in the PUD group versus 11.4 [7.3-13.2] in the CUD group (p = 0.39), while the confidence level was 27.9 ± 7.7 in the PUD group versus 27.4 ± 7.2 in the CUD group (p = 0.76).Conclusion: There was no difference between teaching echocardiographic views using a PUD as compared to a CUD on the PUD image quality, exam time, or confidence level of students.