↓ Skip to main content

Lung ultrasound training: curriculum implementation and learning trajectory among respiratory therapists

Overview of attention for article published in Intensive Care Medicine, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 Mendeley
Title
Lung ultrasound training: curriculum implementation and learning trajectory among respiratory therapists
Published in
Intensive Care Medicine, October 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00134-015-4102-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

K. C. See, V. Ong, S. H. Wong, R. Leanda, J. Santos, J. Taculod, J. Phua, C. M. Teoh

Abstract

Guidelines recommend teaching of lung ultrasound for critical care, though little information exists on how much training is required for independent practice, especially for non-physician trainees. We thus aimed to elucidate a threshold number of cases above which competency for independent practice may be attained for respiratory therapists (RTs). We conducted a prospective audit of lung ultrasound training between July 2014 and April 2015 in our 20-bed medical intensive care unit. Following theoretical instruction and self-learning, trainees acquired images from 12 lung zones under direct supervision and classified images into six patterns. Assistance during image acquisition and correct interpretation of ultrasound images were recorded. Eleven ultrasound-naïve RTs scanned an average of 15 patients each (170 patients in total). Among supervisor-adjudicated lung ultrasound findings, 35.5 % were abnormal. Blinded verification of the adjudicated findings was done for the first 92 patients (1104 images), with an agreement of 95.4 %. As RTs scanned more patients, there was a significant decrease in the proportion of images requiring supervisor assistance (Cuzick's P < 0.001), and a significant increase in the proportion of correctly identified images (Cuzick's P = 0.008). After trainees performed at least ten scans, less than 2 % of images required assistance with acquisition and less than 5 % were wrongly interpreted. Our training method allowed RTs to independently perform lung ultrasound after at least ten directly supervised scans. Given that RTs are likely to have less ultrasound knowledge and less clinical know-how compared to physicians, we believe that the same threshold number of scans may be also safely applied to the latter.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 1%
Japan 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 76 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 21 27%
Student > Master 10 13%
Researcher 9 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 11%
Student > Postgraduate 8 10%
Other 22 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 59 75%
Unspecified 10 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Psychology 1 1%
Other 2 3%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 October 2016.
All research outputs
#1,922,427
of 12,860,125 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#918
of 3,340 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,571
of 265,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#17
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,860,125 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,340 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 265,618 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.