Anesthesiology Training, Jedi Grip, Single-handed Ultrasound-guided Regional Anaesthesia Grip, Single-operator Ultrasound-guided Peripheric Nerve Block
Conditions
Keywords
Jedi Grip, single-operator ultrasound-guided regional anaesthesia grip, Single-handed ultrasound-guided regional anaesthesia, 'On lock' grip, Anesthesiology training
Brief summary
Aim of this study is to compare learning curves of single(1- Jedi grip: Pappin and Christie/ 2- Bedforth/ 3- on lock: Gupta and Berrill) and double operator ultrasound-guided peripheric nerve block techniques on a home-made gelatin-based phantom model.
Detailed description
Ultrasound-guided peripheral blocks are conventionaly performed by double operators. One operator controls both the ultrasound probe and peripheric block needle. Another assistant operator aspirate or injects local anesthetic. In this technique operator do not sense resistance in the syringe. Also this technique requires a well-done communication and coordination between operators. In order to eliminate disadvantages of this technique several single-operator grip techniques of the needle and syringe have been described(1- Jedi grip: Pappin and Christie/ 2- Bedforth/ 3- on lock: Gupta and Berrill). Single operator techniques allow the provider to perform independently. Aim of this study is to compare learning curves of single and double operator ultrasound-guided peripheric nerve block techniques on a home-made gelatin-based phantom model.
Interventions
OTHERreaching targeted area on the phantom model
resident reach the targeted area on the phantom model using ultrasoun guidance and independently or with asistance inject the solution
Sponsors
Ankara City Hospital Bilkent
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
24 Years to 40 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
\- To be a junior resident of anesthesiology(\< 2 years )
Exclusion criteria
* Refusal of resident
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| success of injection3 | during implementation of procedure on phantom model(third session) | successful if injected water flows from hose of model/ unsuccessful if solution do not flow |
| needling time 3 | during implementation of procedure on phantom model(third session) | time to reach target area with block needle |
| success of injection2 | during implementation of procedure on phantom model(second session) | successful if injected water flows from hose of model/ unsuccessful if solution do not flow |
| Time to correct grip1 | during implementation of procedure on phantom model(first session) | Time(sec) from start command to correct grip of the probe, needle and syringe for each technique |
| image quality1 | during implementation of procedure on phantom model(first session) | provided image quality by resident for each technique which is assessed by investigator by four point Liker Scale( 1- much worse 2- worse 3- better 4- much better) |
| number of attempts1 | during implementation of procedure on phantom model(first session) | number of attempts until correct needling to target area |
| needling time 1 | during implementation of procedure on phantom model(first session) | time to reach target area with block needle |
| success of injection1 | during implementation of procedure on phantom model(first session) | successful if injected water flows from hose of model/ unsuccessful if solution do not flow |
| Time to correct grip2 | during implementation of procedure on phantom model(second session) | Time(sec) from start command to correct grip of the probe, needle and syringe for each technique |
| Time to correct grip3 | during implementation of procedure on phantom model(third session) | Time(sec) from start command to correct grip of the probe, needle and syringe for each technique |
| image quality2 | during implementation of procedure on phantom model(second session) | provided image quality by resident for each technique which is assessed by investigator by four point Liker Scale( 1- much worse 2- worse 3- better 4- much better) |
| image quality3 | during implementation of procedure on phantom model(third session) | provided image quality by resident for each technique which is assessed by investigator by four point Liker Scale( 1- much worse 2- worse 3- better 4- much better) |
| number of attempts2 | during implementation of procedure on phantom model(second session) | number of attempts until correct needling to target area |
| number of attempts3 | during implementation of procedure on phantom model(third session) | number of attempts until correct needling to target area |
| needling time 2 | during implementation of procedure on phantom model(second session) | time to reach target area with block needle |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Assesment of education | during education of techniques | Residents assesment of pre-procedural education with a questtionarie. Education was sufficient enough to safely perform peripheral block: 1. I absolutely agree 2. I approve 3. I am indecisive 4. I do not approve 5. Absolutely Disagree |
| NASA-TLX (NASA Task Load Index) | during implementation of procedure on phantom model(third session) | Resident assessment of each techniques for Mental Demand ,Physical Demand, Temporal Demand, Performance, Effort and Frustration |
Countries
Turkey (Türkiye)
Outcome results
None listed