Language of transducer manipulation 2.0: continuing to codify terms for effective teaching

Objectives Accurate communication is an integral component of ultrasound education. In light of the recent global pandemic, this has become even more crucial as many have moved to virtual education out of necessity. Several studies and publications have sought to establish common terminology for car...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The ultrasound journal 2021-10, Vol.13 (1), p.44-6, Article 44
Main Authors: End, Bradley, Prats, Michael I., Minardi, Joseph, Sharon, Melinda, Bahner, David P., Boulger, Creagh T.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Codification
Critical Care Medicine
Diagnostic Radiology
Education
Emergency Medicine
Imaging
Intensive
Interventional Radiology
Language
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Original
Original Article
POCUS
Polls & surveys
Probe motion
Radiology
Terminology
Training
Transducer manipulation
Ultrasonic imaging
Ultrasonic testing
Ultrasound
Ultrasound education
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objectives Accurate communication is an integral component of ultrasound education. In light of the recent global pandemic, this has become even more crucial as many have moved to virtual education out of necessity. Several studies and publications have sought to establish common terminology for cardinal ultrasound probe motions. To date, no studies have been performed to determine which of these terms have been adopted by the ultrasound community at large. Methods A survey was developed which asked respondents to describe videos of six common probe motions in addition to providing basic demographic and training data. The survey was disseminated electronically across various academic listservs and open access resources. Results Data were collected over a 6-week period and yielded 418 unique responses. Responses demonstrated significant variation in terminology related to all 6 cardinal probe motions. While some degree of difference in response can be accounted for by discipline of training, inter-group variation still exists in terminology to describe common probe motions. Of the survey respondents, 57.5% felt that inconsistent probe motion terminology made teaching ultrasound more difficult. Conclusions The results demonstrate that despite efforts to codify probe motions, variation still exists between ultrasound practitioners and educators in the description of cardinal probe motions. This lack of consensus can contribute to challenges in both virtual and in-person ultrasound education.
ISSN:2524-8987
2524-8987
DOI:10.1186/s13089-021-00245-3