A. Weimer, J. Weimer, Svenja Berthold, Stephan Stein, Lukas Müller, Holger Buggenhagen, Gerd Balser, Kay Stankov, M. Sgroi, G. Schmidmaier, Roman Kloeckner, Christian T Schamberger
{"title":"肩关节和膝关节镜检修点:超声和触诊检测的前瞻性比较--哪种方法更适合新手?","authors":"A. Weimer, J. Weimer, Svenja Berthold, Stephan Stein, Lukas Müller, Holger Buggenhagen, Gerd Balser, Kay Stankov, M. Sgroi, G. Schmidmaier, Roman Kloeckner, Christian T Schamberger","doi":"10.1055/a-2271-0098","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Purpose Arthroscopy is one of the most common interventions in\n orthopedics. Hence it is important to train users early in order to ensure the\n safest possible identification of access portals (AP). This prospective study\n aimed to compare a palpatory (PalpMethod) with a sonographic (SonoMethod) method\n for AP location in the shoulder and knee joints.\n Materials and\n Methods The study included trainee doctors (n=68) attending workshops\n (lasting approx. 90 minutes). In these workshops a teaching video initially\n demonstrated the PalpMethod and SonoMethod of AP identification. An experienced\n operator first marked the access portals on the test subject with a UV pen\n (determined ideal point [DIP]). Adhesive film was then affixed to the puncture\n regions. Subsequently participants marked on shoulders and knees first the point\n determined by palpation, then the point determined by sonography. Analysis\n involved DIP visualization with a UV lamp and employed a coordinate system\n around the central DIP. In addition, participants completed an evaluation before\n and after the workshop.\n Results The analysis included 324 measurements\n (n=163 shoulders and n= 161 knees). The majority of participants had not\n previously attended any courses on manual examination (87.9%) or musculoskeletal\n ultrasound (93.9%). Overall, the markings participants made on the shoulder\n using the SonoMethod were significantly closer to the DIP than those made by the\n PalpMethod (Palp 18.8mm ± 14.5mm vs. Sono 11.2mm ± 7.2mm; p<0.001). On the\n knee, however, the markings made by the PalpMethod were significantly closer to\n the DIP overall (Palp 8.0mm ± 3.2mm vs. Sono 12.8mm ± 5.2mm; p<0.001).\n Conclusion The results show that the SonoMethod produces more accurate markings\n on the shoulder, while the PalpMethod is superior for the knee.","PeriodicalId":44852,"journal":{"name":"Ultrasound International Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Shoulder and Knee Arthroscopy Access Point: Prospective Comparison of\\n Sonographic and Palpatory Detection – Which Method is Better for\\n Novices?\",\"authors\":\"A. Weimer, J. Weimer, Svenja Berthold, Stephan Stein, Lukas Müller, Holger Buggenhagen, Gerd Balser, Kay Stankov, M. Sgroi, G. Schmidmaier, Roman Kloeckner, Christian T Schamberger\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2271-0098\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Purpose Arthroscopy is one of the most common interventions in\\n orthopedics. Hence it is important to train users early in order to ensure the\\n safest possible identification of access portals (AP). This prospective study\\n aimed to compare a palpatory (PalpMethod) with a sonographic (SonoMethod) method\\n for AP location in the shoulder and knee joints.\\n Materials and\\n Methods The study included trainee doctors (n=68) attending workshops\\n (lasting approx. 90 minutes). In these workshops a teaching video initially\\n demonstrated the PalpMethod and SonoMethod of AP identification. An experienced\\n operator first marked the access portals on the test subject with a UV pen\\n (determined ideal point [DIP]). Adhesive film was then affixed to the puncture\\n regions. Subsequently participants marked on shoulders and knees first the point\\n determined by palpation, then the point determined by sonography. Analysis\\n involved DIP visualization with a UV lamp and employed a coordinate system\\n around the central DIP. In addition, participants completed an evaluation before\\n and after the workshop.\\n Results The analysis included 324 measurements\\n (n=163 shoulders and n= 161 knees). The majority of participants had not\\n previously attended any courses on manual examination (87.9%) or musculoskeletal\\n ultrasound (93.9%). Overall, the markings participants made on the shoulder\\n using the SonoMethod were significantly closer to the DIP than those made by the\\n PalpMethod (Palp 18.8mm ± 14.5mm vs. Sono 11.2mm ± 7.2mm; p<0.001). On the\\n knee, however, the markings made by the PalpMethod were significantly closer to\\n the DIP overall (Palp 8.0mm ± 3.2mm vs. Sono 12.8mm ± 5.2mm; p<0.001).\\n Conclusion The results show that the SonoMethod produces more accurate markings\\n on the shoulder, while the PalpMethod is superior for the knee.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44852,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ultrasound International Open\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ultrasound International Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2271-0098\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ultrasound International Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2271-0098","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的 关节镜手术是骨科最常见的介入手术之一。因此,必须尽早对使用者进行培训,以确保尽可能安全地识别入路(AP)。这项前瞻性研究旨在比较触诊法(PalpMethod)和超声波法(SonoMethod)在肩关节和膝关节中的 AP 定位方法。材料与方法 该研究包括参加讲习班(持续约 90 分钟)的见习医生(68 人)。在这些研讨会上,教学视频首先演示了PalpMethod和SonoMethod的AP识别方法。一名经验丰富的操作员首先用紫外线笔(确定的理想点 [DIP])在测试对象的通路端口上做标记。然后在穿刺区域粘贴胶膜。随后,受试者首先在肩部和膝盖上标记出通过触诊确定的点,然后再标记出通过超声波确定的点。分析涉及用紫外线灯观察 DIP,并采用围绕 DIP 中心的坐标系。此外,参加者还在研讨会前后完成了一项评估。结果 分析包括 324 次测量(肩关节 163 次,膝关节 161 次)。大多数学员以前未参加过任何徒手检查课程(87.9%)或肌肉骨骼超声课程(93.9%)。总体而言,参与者使用声纳法在肩部所做的标记明显比使用触觉法所做的标记更接近DIP(Palp 18.8mm ± 14.5mm vs. Sono 11.2mm ± 7.2mm; p<0.001)。然而,在膝关节上,PalpMethod 所做的标记总体上明显更接近 DIP(Palp 8.0mm ± 3.2mm vs. Sono 12.8mm ± 5.2mm;p<0.001)。结论 结果表明,SonoMethod 在肩部的标记更准确,而 PalpMethod 在膝部的标记更出色。
Shoulder and Knee Arthroscopy Access Point: Prospective Comparison of
Sonographic and Palpatory Detection – Which Method is Better for
Novices?
Purpose Arthroscopy is one of the most common interventions in
orthopedics. Hence it is important to train users early in order to ensure the
safest possible identification of access portals (AP). This prospective study
aimed to compare a palpatory (PalpMethod) with a sonographic (SonoMethod) method
for AP location in the shoulder and knee joints.
Materials and
Methods The study included trainee doctors (n=68) attending workshops
(lasting approx. 90 minutes). In these workshops a teaching video initially
demonstrated the PalpMethod and SonoMethod of AP identification. An experienced
operator first marked the access portals on the test subject with a UV pen
(determined ideal point [DIP]). Adhesive film was then affixed to the puncture
regions. Subsequently participants marked on shoulders and knees first the point
determined by palpation, then the point determined by sonography. Analysis
involved DIP visualization with a UV lamp and employed a coordinate system
around the central DIP. In addition, participants completed an evaluation before
and after the workshop.
Results The analysis included 324 measurements
(n=163 shoulders and n= 161 knees). The majority of participants had not
previously attended any courses on manual examination (87.9%) or musculoskeletal
ultrasound (93.9%). Overall, the markings participants made on the shoulder
using the SonoMethod were significantly closer to the DIP than those made by the
PalpMethod (Palp 18.8mm ± 14.5mm vs. Sono 11.2mm ± 7.2mm; p<0.001). On the
knee, however, the markings made by the PalpMethod were significantly closer to
the DIP overall (Palp 8.0mm ± 3.2mm vs. Sono 12.8mm ± 5.2mm; p<0.001).
Conclusion The results show that the SonoMethod produces more accurate markings
on the shoulder, while the PalpMethod is superior for the knee.