Arterial Cannulation Simulation Training in Novice Ultrasound Users.

BACKGROUND: Arterial cannulation is an important procedure for hemodynamic monitoring and blood sampling. Traditional radial artery cannulation is performed by using anatomical knowledge and pulse palpation as a guide. Arterial cannulation using ultrasound (US) requires specific training, especially for new US users. We hypothesized that even for new US users, US guidance would facilitate the successful puncture by lower attempts before successful intraluminal cannulation of a simulation model of the radial artery. METHODS: A prospective randomized controlled crossover study was conducted with new US users on a gelatin phantom wrist. Three sessions of training were proposed: US-guided technique with low blood pressure (BP), palpation-guided technique with high BP, and one secondary comparison with low BP. For the 2 first sessions, all volunteers performed each technique but not in the same order. The main criterion was the number of attempts before successful catheterization of the model artery. A secondary criterion was the number of needle movements (the number of attempts plus the number of needle directional changes). RESULTS: Twenty new US users participated in the study. Numbers of attempts before successful catheterization were significantly lower when using the US technique: 1.1 (± 0.4) for US versus 1.6 (± 0.8) for palpation high BP (P = .02) versus 2.5 (± 1.4) for the secondary comparison, palpation low BP (P < .001). All of the participants achieved success after the 12th needle movement for US technique, after the 19th needle movement for palpation high BP, and after the 25th needle movement for the secondary comparison, palpation low BP. The total time before success was not significantly different between the 2 first sequences (US vs palpation high BP). CONCLUSIONS: US technique was more successful than traditional palpation technique for novice US users performing arterial cannulations for the first time. A study in the clinical practice is needed to confirm these results.

The Impact of Classroom Chatter Noise on Comprehension: A Systematic Review.

Communication through discussion and conversations is fundamental to human life; but when such discourse escapes the control of a teacher in the classroom, it becomes little more than chatter. This noise challenges teaching methods and the teaching stance with students. Yet, its impact on comprehension has rarely been studied. The aim of this literature review was to examine the research on the impact of classroom noise generated by chatter on students' comprehension performance. We adopted the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Metanalysis) guidelines to examine this literature. This review covered a 10-year period (papers written between 2009 and 2019), with nine experimental studies selected from the 2,954 papers screened. In 89% of these nine studies, there were significant comprehension differences on all tests, revealed when comprehension took place in a noisy environment due to chatter. This review indicated an essential need for a field survey to better understand the impact of chatter on comprehension. Other studies are recommended to highlight any correlation between measured chatter and student comprehension in a real classroom environment.

Reliability of cuff pressure gauges.

Cuff pressure gauges are the only recommended instrument to perform controls on endotracheal tube cuff pressure during anesthesia. No calibration is mandatory for these devices. The aim of this study was to describe the level of conformity of various cuff pressure gauges. The single-center measurements were performed with a cuff pressure calibrator on all cuff pressure gauges that were usually used in the operating room. Seven measurements (repeat three times) on each cuff pressure gauges at different levels of pressures (i.e. 0, 10, 20, 27, 30, 40 and 50 cmH2O) were performed. Our homologation criteria were either the reliability of the leak test (value of cuff pressure gauges maintained at 120 cmH2O during 5 s) or the difference between the values of the cuff pressure tested and the calibrator below 1.3 cmH2O at the range of 20-30 cmH2O. A total of 567 measurements on 27 cuff pressure gauges were performed. Only 30% (n = 8/27) of the cuff pressure gauges reach our homologation criteria. 30% (n = 8/27) failed at the leak test. 48% (n = 13/27) of the cuff pressure gauges tested, had a calibration variation error > 1.3 cmH2O on the levels of pressure between 20 and 30 cmH2O. A minority of cuff pressure gauges went through our homologation criteria. These results demonstrate us that there is a real problem of the reliability and the follow-up of those medical devices. This study suggests to reinforce biomedical engineering control on these devices.