Comparison of NeedleTrainer™ and ultrasound tissue simulator in a simulated environment among novice regional anaesthesia practitioners

• Published in: BMC MEDICAL EDUCATION
• Main Authors: Mokhtar, Mohammad Nizam; Suhaini, Siti Aisyah; Chan, Weng Ken; Khalid, Iskandar; Tan, Kok Wang; Lim, Angelina Chia Chia; Budiman, Maryam; Samsudin, Afifah; Azizeh, Asmah; Madiman, Vimal Varma Spor; Izaham, Azarinah
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: BMC 2024
• Subjects: Education & Educational Research
• Online Access: https://www-webofscience-com.uitm.idm.oclc.org/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:001362391300002
• ISSN: 1472-6920
• DOI: 10.1186/s12909-024-06361-7

Background: Utilising ultrasound technology has resulted in higher success and lower complication rates during regional anaesthesia (RA) procedures. Proper training is necessary to accurately identify structures, optimise images, and improve hand-eye coordination. Simulation training using immersive virtual environments and simulation models has enabled this competency training to be conducted safely before performing on patients. We conducted a study to compare the simulator performance and users' feedback on a Blue Phantom Regional Anaesthesia Ultrasound Training Block and NeedleTrainer (TM). Methods: Forty-seven participants were recruited via convenient sampling during a RA workshop for novice practitioners. They were divided into the N or B group and then crossover to experience using both Blue Phantom and NeedleTrainer model. Time-to-reach-target, first-pass success rate, and complication rate were assessed, while the learning and confidence scores were rated using six-item and three-item questionnaires, respectively, via a 5-point Likert scale. Results: Blue Phantom model has a longer time-to-target as compared to the NeedleTrainer model (16 +/- 8 vs 8 +/- 3 s, p < 0.001), higher first- pass success rate (100% vs 80.9%), and lower complication rate (0% vs 19.1%). Higher overall learning satisfaction scores (28 +/- 4 vs 25 +/- 4, p = 0.003) and confidence scores after training (13 +/- 2 vs 12 +/- 2, p < 0.001) were recorded for the Blue Phantom model. Conclusions: We postulated that the artificial intelligence structure recognition software enables NeedleTrainer users to attain shorter time-to-target. That being said, Blue Phantom provides better operator learning satisfaction, improved confidence, higher success and lower complication rates among novice RA practitioners, possibly due to greater tactile feedback during the simulated training.