Simulation Training for Epidural Placement: A Randomized Trial Comparing the Use of an Ex Vivo Porcine Spine Model With the M43B Lumbar Puncture Simulator IIA Model.

Q3 Medicine
Clare K Banigan, Loralee Sessanna, Brian Lowe, Tyler J Rolland
{"title":"Simulation Training for Epidural Placement: A Randomized Trial Comparing the Use of an Ex Vivo Porcine Spine Model With the M43B Lumbar Puncture Simulator IIA Model.","authors":"Clare K Banigan, Loralee Sessanna, Brian Lowe, Tyler J Rolland","doi":"10.70278/AANAJ/.0000001017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Proficiency in epidural placement remains a challenging skill for anesthesia providers, requiring the ability to discern loss of resistance (LOR) when entering the epidural space. Current educational manikins lack the tactile feedback required for realistic epidural training. This descriptive pilot study aimed to compare an <i>ex vivo</i> porcine spine model with the M43B manikin model for simulation of clinical epidural placement. Expert anesthesia providers (n = 10) evaluated physical characteristics of each model using a survey comprised of a visual analog scale (0-100) and qualitative open-ended questions. Continuous data were analyzed using paired two-tailed Student's t tests, while qualitative open-ended narrative responses were reported by response frequency. Epidural simulation with the porcine spine demonstrated significantly higher clinical similarity scores (<i>P</i> < .001) for ligamentum flavum feel (85 ± 4.5 vs. 32 ± 8.1), LOR (93.5 ± 3.0 vs. 42.5 ± 10.7), catheter insertion (92.3 ± 3.9 vs. 48.8 ± 8.0), and novice training utility (92.5 ± 3.3 vs. 41.5 ± 7.7), while landmark identification (iliac crest/spinous processes) was comparable between models. Providers unanimously preferred the porcine model for epidural simulation. Simulation using an <i>ex vivo</i> porcine spine model enhances the realism of epidural training and underscores the importance of utilizing clinically relevant models for anesthesia procedural skill acquisition and maintenance.</p>","PeriodicalId":7104,"journal":{"name":"AANA journal","volume":"93 2","pages":"117-124"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AANA journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.70278/AANAJ/.0000001017","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Proficiency in epidural placement remains a challenging skill for anesthesia providers, requiring the ability to discern loss of resistance (LOR) when entering the epidural space. Current educational manikins lack the tactile feedback required for realistic epidural training. This descriptive pilot study aimed to compare an ex vivo porcine spine model with the M43B manikin model for simulation of clinical epidural placement. Expert anesthesia providers (n = 10) evaluated physical characteristics of each model using a survey comprised of a visual analog scale (0-100) and qualitative open-ended questions. Continuous data were analyzed using paired two-tailed Student's t tests, while qualitative open-ended narrative responses were reported by response frequency. Epidural simulation with the porcine spine demonstrated significantly higher clinical similarity scores (P < .001) for ligamentum flavum feel (85 ± 4.5 vs. 32 ± 8.1), LOR (93.5 ± 3.0 vs. 42.5 ± 10.7), catheter insertion (92.3 ± 3.9 vs. 48.8 ± 8.0), and novice training utility (92.5 ± 3.3 vs. 41.5 ± 7.7), while landmark identification (iliac crest/spinous processes) was comparable between models. Providers unanimously preferred the porcine model for epidural simulation. Simulation using an ex vivo porcine spine model enhances the realism of epidural training and underscores the importance of utilizing clinically relevant models for anesthesia procedural skill acquisition and maintenance.

硬膜外放置的模拟训练:一项比较离体猪脊柱模型与M43B腰椎穿刺模拟器IIA模型的随机试验。
熟练掌握硬膜外放置仍然是麻醉提供者的一个具有挑战性的技能,需要有能力辨别进入硬膜外腔时阻力损失(LOR)。目前的教育模型缺乏实际硬膜外训练所需的触觉反馈。这项描述性的初步研究旨在比较离体猪脊柱模型和M43B人体模型,以模拟临床硬膜外放置。麻醉专家(n = 10)使用由视觉模拟量表(0-100)和定性开放式问题组成的调查来评估每个模型的物理特征。使用配对双尾Student’st检验对连续数据进行分析,而定性开放式叙述性反应则通过反应频率报告。猪脊柱硬膜外模拟在黄韧带感觉(85±4.5 vs. 32±8.1)、LOR(93.5±3.0 vs. 42.5±10.7)、导管插入(92.3±3.9 vs. 48.8±8.0)和新手训练效用(92.5±3.3 vs. 41.5±7.7)方面的临床相似评分(P < 0.001)显著较高,而标志识别(髂嵴/棘突)在模型之间具有可比性。提供者一致选择猪模型进行硬膜外模拟。体外猪脊柱模型的模拟增强了硬膜外训练的真实性,并强调了利用临床相关模型获得和维持麻醉程序技能的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
AANA journal
AANA journal Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
60
期刊介绍: Founded in 1931 and located in Park Ridge, Ill., the AANA is the professional organization for more than 90 percent of the nation’s nurse anesthetists. As advanced practice nurses, CRNAs administer approximately 32 million anesthetics in the United States each year. CRNAs practice in every setting where anesthesia is available and are the sole anesthesia providers in more than two-thirds of all rural hospitals. They administer every type of anesthetic, and provide care for every type of surgery or procedure, from open heart to cataract to pain management.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信