Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Teaching methods, facilities, and institutions in student ultrasound education (SUSE): e-learning, simulation, and ultrasound skills labs Cover

References

  1. Facilities Guidelines Institute, United States, Department of Health and Human Services, and American Society for Healthcare Engineering. Guidelines for Design and Construction of Health Care Facilities. 2010 ed. Chicago, IL: ASHE American Society for Healthcare Engineering of the American Hospital Association, 2010. Available from: https://fgiguidelines.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/2010_FGI_Guidelines.pdf.
  2. Ruiz JG, Mintzer MJ, Leipzig RM: The impact of e-learning in medical education. Acad Med 2006; 81: 207–212. doi: 10.1097/00001888-200603000-00002.
  3. Sweileh WM: Global research activity on e-learning in health sciences education: a bibliometric analysis. Med Sci Educ 2021; 31: 765–775. doi: 10.1007/s40670-021-01254-6.
  4. Dietrich CF, Lucius C, Nielsen MB, Burmester E, Westerway SC, Chu CY et al.: The ultrasound use of simulators, current view, and perspectives: Requirements and technical aspects (WFUMB state of the art paper). Endosc Ultrasound 2023; 12: 38–49. doi: 10.4103/eus-d-22-00197.
  5. Lucius C, Koch JBH, Jenssen C, Karlas T, Sänger SL, Dietrich CF: State of the art: Simulation in der Ultraschallausbildung. Z Gastroenterol 2024; 62: 723–736. German. doi: 10.1055/a-2183-1888.
  6. Lucius C, Nielsen MB, Blaivas M, Burmester E, Westerway SC, Chu CY et al.: The use of simulation in medical ultrasound: Current perspectives on applications and practical implementation (WFUMB state-of-the-art paper). Endosc Ultrasound 2023; 12: 311–318. doi: 10.1097/eus.0000000000000022.
  7. Stoehr F, Müller L, Brady A, Trilla A, Mähringer-Kunz A, Hahn F et al.: How COVID-19 kick-started online learning in medical education – The DigiMed study. PLoS One 2021; 16: e0257394. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0257394.
  8. Brika SKM, Chergui K, Algamdi A, Musa AA, Zouaghi R: E-Learning Research Trends in Higher Education in Light of COVID-19: A Bibliometric Analysis. Front Psychol 2021; 12: 762819. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.762819.
  9. Höhne E, Schäfer VS, Neubauer R, Gotta J, Reschke P, Wittek A et al.: A four year follow-up survey on the teledidactic TELUS ultrasound course: long-term benefits and implications. BMC Med Educ 2024; 24: 1022. doi: 10.1186/s12909-024-05993-z.
  10. Höhne E, Recker F, Brossart P, Schäfer VS: Teledidactic Versus Hands-on Teaching of Abdominal, Thoracic, and Thyroid Ultrasound – The TELUS II Study. J Gen Intern Med 2024; 39: 1803–1810. doi: 10.1007/s11606-024-08760-4.
  11. Dost S, Hossain A, Shehab M, Abdelwahed A, Al-Nusair L: Perceptions of medical students towards online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic: a national cross-sectional survey of 2721 UK medical students. BMJ Open 2020; 10: e042378. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042378.
  12. Daum N, Boten D, Schutz T, Sendeski M, Spethmann S: Erwerb von Medienkompetenz zur Durchführung eines synchronen Online-Tutoriums zur Entwicklung fachlich-methodischer Basiskompetenzen in der medizinischen Aus- und Weiterbildung. Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Medizinische Ausbildung (GMA). Zürich, Schweiz 2021. doi: 10.3205/21gma142.
  13. Boten DN, Daum N, Schutz T, Spethmann S: From Videogames to Teaching – Different Camera Perspectives in an Interactive Synchronous Online Tutorial. Med Sci Educ 2023; 33: 1029–1031. doi: 10.1007/s40670-023-01833-9.
  14. Altersberger M, Pavelka P, Sachs A, Weber M, Wagner-Menghin M, Prosch H: Student Perceptions of Instructional Ultrasound Videos as Preparation for a Practical Assessment. Ultrasound Int Open 2019; 5: E81–E8. doi: 10.1055/a-1024-4573.
  15. Horn CL, Müller L, Dirks K, Weinmann-Menke J, Weimer A, Diorio F et al.: Comparison of two different (digital vs. analog) ultrasound learning devices – the „DIvAN-study”. Ultraschall Med 2022; 43(S 01): 78. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-1749575.
  16. Chan TM, Stehman C, Gottlieb M, Thoma B: A Short History of Free Open Access Medical Education. The Past, Present, and Future. ATS Sch 2020; 1: 87–100. doi: 10.34197/ats-scholar.2020-0014PS.
  17. Latif MZ, Hussain I, Saeed R, Qureshi MA, Maqsood U: Use of Smart Phones and Social Media in Medical Education: Trends, Advantages, Challenges and Barriers. Acta Inform Med 2019; 27: 133–138. doi: 10.5455/aim.2019.27.133-138.
  18. D'Souza F, Shah S, Oki O, Scrivens L, Guckian J: Social media: medical education's double-edged sword. Future Healthc J 2021; 8: e307–e10. doi: 10.7861/fhj.2020-0164.
  19. Guckian J, Utukuri M, Asif A, Burton O, Adeyoju J, Oumeziane A et al.: Social media in undergraduate medical education: A systematic review. Med Educ 2021; 55: 1227–1241. doi: 10.1111/medu.14567.
  20. Mallin M, Schlein S, Doctor S, Stroud S, Dawson M, Fix M: A survey of the current utilization of asynchronous education among emergency medicine residents in the United States. Acad Med 2014; 89: 598–601. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000170.
  21. Premkumar K, Pahwa P, Banerjee A, Baptiste K, Bhatt H, Lim HJ: Does medical training promote or deter self-directed learning? A longitudinal mixed-methods study. Acad Med 2013; 88: 1754–1764. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182a9262d.
  22. Reed S, Shell R, Kassis K, Tartaglia K, Wallihan R, Smith K et al.: Applying adult learning practices in medical education. Curr Probl Pediatr Adolesc Health Care 2014; 44: 170–181. doi: 10.1016/j.cppeds.2014.01.008.
  23. Chenkin J, Lee S, Huynh T, Bandiera G: Procedures can be learned on the Web: a randomized study of ultrasound-guided vascular access training. Acad Emerg Med 2008; 15: 949–954. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2008.00231.x.
  24. Hempel D, Haunhorst S, Sinnathurai S, Seibel A, Recker F, Heringer F et al.: Social media to supplement point-of-care ultrasound courses: the “sandwich e-learning” approach. A randomized trial. Crit Ultrasound J 2016; 8: 3. doi: 10.1186/s13089-016-0037-9.
  25. Coiffier B, Shen PCH, Lee EYP, Kwong TSP, Lai AYT, Wong EMF et al.: Introducing point-of-care ultrasound through structured multifaceted ultrasound module in the undergraduate medical curriculum at the University of Hong Kong. Ultrasound 2020; 28: 38–46. doi: 10.1177/1742271X19847224.
  26. Lin-Martore M, Olvera MP, Kornblith AE, Zapala M, Addo N, Lin M et al.: Evaluating a Web-based Point-of-care Ultrasound Curriculum for the Diagnosis of Intussusception. AEM Educ Train 2021; 5: e10526. doi: 10.1002/aet2.10526.
  27. Situ-LaCasse E, Acuña J, Huynh D, Amini R, Irving S, Samsel K et al.: Can ultrasound novices develop image acquisition skills after reviewing online ultrasound modules? BMC Med Educ 2021; 21: 175. doi: 10.1186/s12909-021-02612-z.
  28. Alsafi N, Alsafi A: Instagram: A platform for ultrasound education? Ultrasound 2021; 29: 44–47. doi: 10.1177/1742271X20920908.
  29. Lien WC, Lin P, Chang CH, Wu MC, Wu CY: The effect of e-learning on point-of-care ultrasound education in novices. Med Educ Online 2023; 28: 2152522. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2022.2152522.
  30. Blank V, Strobel D, Karlas T: Digital Training Formats in Ultrasound Diagnostics for physicians: What options are available and how can they be successfully integrated into current DEGUM certified course concepts? Ultraschall Med 2022; 43: 428–434. doi: 10.1055/a-1900-8166.
  31. Hempel D, Sinnathurai S, Haunhorst S, Seibel A, Michels G, Heringer F et al.: Influence of case-based e-learning on students' performance in point-of-care ultrasound courses: a randomized trial. Eur J Emerg Med 2015. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000270.
  32. Räschle N, Hari R: [Blended Learning Basic Course Sonography – A SGUM Accredited Ultrasound Course Based on Peer-Tutoring]. Praxis (Bern 1994). 2018; 107: 1255–1259. doi: 10.1024/1661-8157/a003116.
  33. Rosenfeldt Nielsen M, Kristensen EQ, Jensen RO, Mollerup AM, Pfeiffer T, Graumann O: Clinical Ultrasound Education for Medical Students: Virtual Reality Versus e-Learning, a Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial. Ultrasound Q 2021; 37: 292–296. doi: 10.1097/ruq.0000000000000558.
  34. Perice L, Naraghi L, Likourezos A, Singh H, Haines L: Implementation of a novel digital ultrasound education tool into an emergency medicine rotation: Ultra-soundBox. AEM Educ Train 2022; 6: e10765. doi: 10.1002/aet2.10765.
  35. Duarte ML, Santos LRD, Iared W, Peccin MS: Comparison of ultrasonography learning between distance teaching and traditional methodology. An educational systematic review. Sao Paulo Med. J 2022; 140: 806–817. doi: 10.1590/1516-3180.2021.1047.R.19052022.
  36. Dietrich CF, Sirli RL, Barth G, Blaivas M, Daum N, Dong Y et al.: Student ultrasound education – current views and controversies. Ultraschall Med 2024; 45: 389–394. doi: 10.1055/a-2265-1070.
  37. Krüger R, Weinmann-Menke J, Buggenhange H, Kurz S, Bellhäuser H, Weimer AM et al.: Blended Learning improves FoCUS cardiac ultrasound training for undergraduates-a prospective, controlled, randomized single-center study. Ultraschall in der Medizin – European Journal of Ultrasound. 2023; 44. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-1772433.
  38. Neubauer R, Bauer CJ, Dietrich CF, Strizek B, Schäfer VS, Recker F: Evidence-based Ultrasound Education? – A Systematic Literature Review of Undergraduate Ultrasound Training Studies. Ultrasound Int Open 2024; 10: a22750702. doi: 10.1055/a-2275-0702.
  39. Daum N, Blaivas M, Goudie A, Hoffmann B, Jenssen C, Neubauer R et al.: Student ultrasound education, current view and controversies. Role of Artificial Intelligence, Virtual Reality and telemedicine. Ultrasound J 2024; 16: 44. doi: 10.1186/s13089-024-00382-5.
  40. Daum N, Neubauer R, Boten D, Dietrich CF: Studentische Ultraschall-Ausbil-dung: Rolle von Künstlicher Intelligenz, Virtueller Realität und Telemedizin. Ultraschall Med 2024; 45(S 01): A-287. doi: 10.1055/s-0044-1789051.
  41. Kahr Rasmussen N, Nayahangan LJ, Carlsen J, Ekberg O, Brabrand K, Albrecht-Beste E et al.: Evaluation of competence in ultrasound-guided procedures – a generic assessment tool developed through the Delphi method. Eur Radiol 2021; 31: 4203–4211. doi: 10.1007/s00330-020-07280-z.
  42. Eder N, Daum N, Seckinger DA, Nürnberg D, Jenssen C: A National Register for Interventional Ultrasound (INVUS) in Germany: outline and preliminary results of a pilot study. Ultrasound Med Biol 2022; 48: S76. doi: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2022.04.210.
  43. Lorentzen T, Nolsøe CP, Ewertsen C, Nielsen MB, Leen E, Havre RF et al.: EFSUMB Guidelines on Interventional Ultrasound (INVUS), Part I. General Aspects (long Version). Ultraschall Med 2015; 36: E1–14. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1553593.
  44. O'Leary FM, Janson P: Can e-learning improve medical students' knowledge and competence in paediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation? A prospective before and after study. Emerg Med Australas 2010; 22: 324–329. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-6723.2010.01302.x.
  45. Emanuel EJ: The Inevitable Reimagining of Medical Education. JAMA 2020; 323: 1127–1128. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.1227.
  46. Lewis KO, Cidon MJ, Seto TL, Chen H, Mahan JD: Leveraging e-learning in medical education. Curr Probl Pediatr Adolesc Health Care 2014; 44: 150–163. doi: 10.1016/j.cppeds.2014.01.004.
  47. Welsh J, Lu Y, Dhruva SS, Bikdeli B, Desai NR, Benchetrit L et al.: Age of Data at the Time of Publication of Contemporary Clinical Trials. JAMA Netw Open 2018; 1: e181065. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.1065.
  48. Dietrich CF, Hoffmann B, Cantisani V, Dong Y, Hari R, Nisenbaum H et al.: Medical Student Ultrasound Education, a WFUMB Position Paper, Part I, response to the letter to the Editor. Ultrasound Med Biol 2019; 45: 1857–1859. doi: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2019.02.020.
  49. Thoma B, Sebok-Syer SS, Krishnan K, Siemens M, Trueger NS, Colmers-Gray I et al.: Individual Gestalt Is Unreliable for the Evaluation of Quality in Medical Education Blogs: A METRIQ Study. Ann Emerg Med 2017; 70: 394–401. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2016.12.025.
  50. Azim A, Beck-Esmay J, Chan TM: Editorial Processes in Free Open Access Medical Educational (FOAM) Resources. AEM Educ Train 2018; 2: 204–212. doi: 10.1002/aet2.10097.
  51. Chan TM, Grock A, Paddock M, Kulasegaram K, Yarris LM, Lin M: Examining Reliability and Validity of an Online Score (ALiEM AIR) for Rating Free Open Access Medical Education Resources. Ann Emerg Med 2016; 68: 729–735. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2016.02.018.
  52. Thoma B, Chan TM, Kapur P, Sifford D, Siemens M, Paddock M et al.: The Social Media Index as an Indicator of Quality for Emergency Medicine Blogs: A METRIQ Study. Ann Emerg Med 2018; 72: 696–702. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2018.05.003.
  53. Mese I, Altintas Taslicay C, Kuzan BN, Kuzan TY, Sivrioglu AK: Educating the next generation of radiologists: a comparative report of ChatGPT and e-learning resources. Diagn Interv Radiol 2024; 30: 163–174. doi: 10.4274/dir.2023.232496.
  54. Stuntz R, Clontz R: An Evaluation of Emergency Medicine Core Content Covered by Free Open Access Medical Education Resources. Ann Emerg Med 2016; 67: 649–653: e2. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2015.12.020.
  55. Tolsgaard MG, Todsen T, Sorensen JL, Ringsted C, Lorentzen T, Ottesen B et al.: International multispecialty consensus on how to evaluate ultrasound competence: a Delphi consensus survey. PLoS One 2013; 8: e57687. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0057687.
  56. Lorentzen T, Nolsoe CP, Ewertsen C, Nielsen MB, Leen E, Havre RF et al.: EFSUMB Guidelines on Interventional Ultrasound (INVUS), Part I. General Aspects (long Version). Ultraschall Med 2015; 36: E1–14. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1553593.
  57. Dyre L, Tabor A, Ringsted C, Tolsgaard MG: Imperfect practice makes perfect: error management training improves transfer of learning. Med Educ 2017; 51: 196–206. doi: 10.1111/medu.13208.
  58. Lufler RS, Zumwalt AC, Romney CA, Hoagland TM: Effect of visual-spatial ability on medical students' performance in a gross anatomy course. Anat Sci Educ 2012; 5: 3–9. doi: 10.1002/ase.264.
  59. Canty DJ, Hayes JA, Story DA, Royse CF: Ultrasound simulator-assisted teaching of cardiac anatomy to preclinical anatomy students: A pilot randomized trial of a three-hour learning exposure. Anat Sci Educ 2015; 8: 21–30. doi: 10.1002/ase.1452.
  60. Hu KC, Salcedo D, Kang YN, Lin CW, Hsu CW, Cheng CY et al.: Impact of virtual reality anatomy training on ultrasound competency development: A randomized controlled trial. PLoS One 2020; 15: e0242731. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242731.
  61. Halpern SA, Brace EJ, Hall AJ, Morrison RG, Patel DV, Yuh JY et al.: 3-D modeling applications in ultrasound education: a systematic review. Ultrasound Med Biol 2022; 48: 188–197. doi: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2021.09.018.
  62. Weimer J, Recker F, Hasenburg A, Buggenhagen H, Karbach K, Beer L et al.: Development and evaluation of a “simulator-based” ultrasound training program for university teaching in obstetrics and gynecology – the prospective GynSim study. Front Med (Lausanne) 2024; 11: 1371141. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1371141.
  63. Chalouhi GE, Quibel T, Lamourdedieu C, Hajal NJ, Gueneuc A, Benzina N et al.: [Obstetrical ultrasound simulator as a tool for improving teaching strategies for beginners: Pilot study and review of the literature]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 2016; 45: 1107–1114. doi: 10.1016/j.jgyn.2015.12.011.
  64. Bentley S, Mudan G, Strother C, Wong N: Are Live Ultrasound Models Replaceable? Traditional versus Simulated Education Module for FAST Exam. West J Emerg Med 2015; 16: 818–822. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2015.9.27276.
  65. Le CK, Lewis J, Steinmetz P, Dyachenko A, Oleskevich S: The Use of Ultrasound Simulators to Strengthen Scanning Skills in Medical Students: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Ultrasound Med 2019; 38: 1249–1257. doi: 10.1002/jum.14805.
  66. Andersen NL, Jensen RO, Konge L, Laursen CB, Falster C, Jacobsen N et al.: Immersive Virtual Reality in Basic Point-of-Care Ultrasound Training: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Ultrasound Med Biol 2023; 49: 178–185. doi: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2022.08.012.
  67. Bowman A, Reid D, Bobby Harreveld R, Lawson C: Evaluation of post-simulation sonographer students' professional behaviour in the workplace. Radiography (Lond) 2022; 28: 889–896. doi: 10.1016/j.radi.2022.06.010.
  68. Hattle J: The Applicability of Visible Learning to Higher Education. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology 2015; 1: 79–91. doi: 10.1037/stl0000021.
  69. Johri AM, Durbin J, Newbigging J, Tanzola R, Chow R, De S, Tam J: Cardiac Point-of-Care Ultrasound: State-of-the-Art in Medical School Education. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2018; 31: 749–760. doi: 10.1016/j.echo.2018.01.014.
  70. Bjerrum F, Thomsen ASS, Nayahangan LJ, Konge L: Surgical simulation: Current practices and future perspectives for technical skills training. Med Teach 2018; 40: 668–675. doi: 10.1080/0142159x.2018.1472754.
  71. AlQhtani A, AlSwedan N, Almulhim A, Aladwan R, Alessa Y, AlQhtani K et al.: Online versus classroom teaching for medical students during COVID-19: measuring effectiveness and satisfaction. BMC Med Educ 2021; 21: 452. doi: 10.1186/s12909-021-02888-1.
  72. Lewiss RE, Hoffmann B, Beaulieu Y, Phelan MB: Point-of-care ultrasound education: the increasing role of simulation and multimedia resources. J Ultrasound Med 2014; 33: 27–32. doi: 10.7863/ultra.33.1.27.
  73. Lane N, Lahham S, Joseph L, Bahner DP, Fox JC: Ultrasound in medical education: listening to the echoes of the past to shape a vision for the future. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg 2015; 41: 461–467. doi: 10.1007/s00068-015-0535-7.
  74. Cawthorn TR, Nickel C, O'Reilly M, Kafka H, Tam JW, Jackson LC et al.: Development and evaluation of methodologies for teaching focused cardiac ultrasound skills to medical students. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2014; 27: 302–309. doi: 10.1016/j.echo.2013.12.006.
  75. Vallee A, Blacher J, Cariou A, Sorbets E: Blended Learning Compared to Traditional Learning in Medical Education: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Med Internet Res 2020; 22: e16504. doi: 10.2196/16504.
  76. Back SJ, Darge K, Bedoya MA, Delgado J, Gorfu Y, Zewdneh D et al.: Ultrasound Tutorials in Under 10 Minutes: Experience and Results. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2016; 207: 653–660. doi: 10.2214/AJR.16.16402.
  77. Delungahawatta T, Dunne SS, Hyde S, Halpenny L, McGrath D, O'Regan A et al.: Advances in e-learning in undergraduate clinical medicine: a systematic review. BMC Med Educ 2022; 22: 711. doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03773-1.
  78. Gunabushanam G, Nautsch F, Mills I, Scoutt LM. Accessible Personal Ultra-sound Training Simulator. J Ultrasound Med 2019; 38: 1425–1432. doi: 10.1002/jum.14820.
  79. MFT Medizinischer Fakultätentag der Bundesrepublik Deutschland e.V. Nationaler Kompetenzbasierter Lernzielkatalog Medizin (NKLM) 2015. Available from: https://medizinische-fakultaeten.de/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/nklm_final_2015-12-04.pdf. (access: 20.01.2025)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15557/jou.2025.0014 | Journal eISSN: 2451-070X | Journal ISSN: 2084-8404
Language: English
Submitted on: Feb 14, 2025
Accepted on: Mar 31, 2025
Published on: Apr 28, 2025
Published by: MEDICAL COMMUNICATIONS Sp. z o.o.
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

© 2025 Nils Daum, Jannis Schwanemann, Michael Blaivas, Michael Ignacio Prats, Roman Hari, Beatrice Hoffmann, Christian Jenssen, Alexander Krutz, Claudia Lucius, Ricarda Neubauer, Florian Recker, Roxana Sirli, Susan Cambell Westerway, Constantinos Zervides, Dieter Nürnberg, Gregor Barth, Nasenien Nourkami-Tutdibi, Christoph Frank Dietrich, published by MEDICAL COMMUNICATIONS Sp. z o.o.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.