PICS Live Case Demonstrations: Five-Year Review of a Collaborative Experience.

Catalina Vargas Acevedo, Ziyad M Hijazi, Damien Kenny, Gareth J Morgan
{"title":"PICS Live Case Demonstrations: Five-Year Review of a Collaborative Experience.","authors":"Catalina Vargas Acevedo, Ziyad M Hijazi, Damien Kenny, Gareth J Morgan","doi":"10.1002/ccd.70915","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Live case demonstrations are widely used in interventional cardiology for procedural education and exchange of techniques and experience. Their educational value must be balanced against concerns regarding patient safety, privacy, and the potential influence of live discussion on procedural decision-making. We sought to characterize the Pediatric and Congenital Interventional Cardiovascular Society (PICS) live case experience and identify potential effects of live broadcasting on patient care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a retrospective qualitative and semi-quantitative review of PICS live case demonstrations from 2018 to 2023 for which a digitized archive was available. Case characteristics, procedures, devices, discussion content, procedural outcomes, adverse events, broadcast-related \"red flags,\" and changes in procedural strategy associated with live discussion were recorded. Qualitative content was analyzed using a general inductive approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ninety-four clinical cases from 28 hospitals in 11 countries were analyzed. Patients ranged from premature neonates to adults, with 54 (57.4%) involving adults with congenital/structural heart disease. Transcatheter pulmonary valve replacement was the most frequently presented procedure (27.7%). Two significant procedural adverse events (2.1%) occurred; neither could be directly attributed to the live broadcast. Live discussion influenced the stated procedural strategy in seven cases (7.4%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PICS live case demonstrations encompass a broad spectrum of patients, procedures, institutions, and international practice. No adverse events were directly attributed to live broadcasting, although issues related to patient privacy, procedural delays, and the influence of discussion on procedural decision-making were identified. Structured case selection, experienced moderation, separation of procedural and communication responsibilities, and adherence to a standardized code of conduct may help preserve educational value while prioritizing patient safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":520583,"journal":{"name":"Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.70915","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Live case demonstrations are widely used in interventional cardiology for procedural education and exchange of techniques and experience. Their educational value must be balanced against concerns regarding patient safety, privacy, and the potential influence of live discussion on procedural decision-making. We sought to characterize the Pediatric and Congenital Interventional Cardiovascular Society (PICS) live case experience and identify potential effects of live broadcasting on patient care.

Methods: We performed a retrospective qualitative and semi-quantitative review of PICS live case demonstrations from 2018 to 2023 for which a digitized archive was available. Case characteristics, procedures, devices, discussion content, procedural outcomes, adverse events, broadcast-related "red flags," and changes in procedural strategy associated with live discussion were recorded. Qualitative content was analyzed using a general inductive approach.

Results: Ninety-four clinical cases from 28 hospitals in 11 countries were analyzed. Patients ranged from premature neonates to adults, with 54 (57.4%) involving adults with congenital/structural heart disease. Transcatheter pulmonary valve replacement was the most frequently presented procedure (27.7%). Two significant procedural adverse events (2.1%) occurred; neither could be directly attributed to the live broadcast. Live discussion influenced the stated procedural strategy in seven cases (7.4%).

Conclusions: PICS live case demonstrations encompass a broad spectrum of patients, procedures, institutions, and international practice. No adverse events were directly attributed to live broadcasting, although issues related to patient privacy, procedural delays, and the influence of discussion on procedural decision-making were identified. Structured case selection, experienced moderation, separation of procedural and communication responsibilities, and adherence to a standardized code of conduct may help preserve educational value while prioritizing patient safety.

PICS现场案例演示:五年合作经验回顾。
背景:现场案例演示在介入心脏病学中广泛应用于程序教育和技术经验交流。它们的教育价值必须与对患者安全、隐私和现场讨论对程序决策的潜在影响的关注相平衡。我们试图描述儿科和先天性介入心血管学会(PICS)的现场病例经验,并确定现场直播对患者护理的潜在影响。方法:我们对2018年至2023年的PICS现场案例进行了回顾性定性和半定量回顾,并提供了数字化档案。记录了病例特征、程序、设备、讨论内容、程序结果、不良事件、广播相关的“危险信号”以及与现场讨论相关的程序策略的变化。定性内容分析采用一般归纳方法。结果:对11个国家28家医院94例临床病例进行分析。患者范围从早产儿到成人,54例(57.4%)涉及患有先天性/结构性心脏病的成人。经导管肺瓣膜置换术是最常见的手术(27.7%)。发生2例明显的程序性不良事件(2.1%);两者都不能直接归因于直播。7例(7.4%)现场讨论影响了所述的程序策略。结论:PICS现场案例演示涵盖了广泛的患者、程序、机构和国际惯例。虽然发现了与患者隐私、程序延误和讨论对程序决策的影响有关的问题,但没有直接归因于直播的不良事件。有组织的病例选择、有经验的节制、程序和沟通责任的分离以及对标准化行为准则的遵守可能有助于在优先考虑患者安全的同时保持教育价值。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
小红书