从新手到熟练:比较兽医学生使用TonoPen, TonoVet和TonoVet Plus的血压计学习曲线

IF 1.8 3区 农林科学 Q1 VETERINARY SCIENCES
Dikla Arad, Lionel Sebbag, Karin W. Handel, Yamit Soueid, Bar Fruchter, Noya Aharon, Oren Pe'er, Ron Ofri
{"title":"从新手到熟练:比较兽医学生使用TonoPen, TonoVet和TonoVet Plus的血压计学习曲线","authors":"Dikla Arad,&nbsp;Lionel Sebbag,&nbsp;Karin W. Handel,&nbsp;Yamit Soueid,&nbsp;Bar Fruchter,&nbsp;Noya Aharon,&nbsp;Oren Pe'er,&nbsp;Ron Ofri","doi":"10.1016/j.rvsc.2025.105906","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Our aim was to compare learning curves of final year veterinary students using three commonly-used tonometers for measuring intraocular pressure (IOP) in dogs: TonoPen XL (TP), TonoVet (TV), and TonoVet Plus (TVP). Students were randomly assigned to use one of the tonometers, and their performance metrics (IOP readings, number of attempts and time required to obtain a valid reading) were recorded over a one-week period and compared to those of experienced clinicians. Tonometry data were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models, and student-clinician IOP agreement was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). In the TVP group (<em>n</em> = 39), students took the longest to measure (+9.1 s compared to clinicians, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001), showed a non-significant trend toward time improvement (reduction ≤0.5 s/test, <em>p</em> ≥ 0.095), and demonstrated the highest agreement with clinicians (ICC = 0.71). In the TV group (<em>n</em> = 38), students took longer to measure than with TP and less time than with TVP (+6.9 s, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001) but had significant improvement in measurement time (reduction of 1.03 s/test, <em>p</em> = 0.023) and moderate agreement (ICC = 0.68). In the TP group (<em>n</em> = 37), students were fastest (+5.7 s, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001) and required fewer attempts to obtain valid readings (reduction of 0.056 attempts/eye, <em>p</em> = 0.015), though this group had the lowest student-clinician agreement (ICC = 0.53). Our results show that student performance improved with all tonometers. TP demonstrated the shortest learning curve but had the poorest agreement with clinician measurements. TVP yielded the best agreement but required a longer learning curve. TV offered a balance between learning curve and measurement consistency. These findings highlight the distinct learning characteristics of each device and can improve targeted training strategies in veterinary education.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":21083,"journal":{"name":"Research in veterinary science","volume":"196 ","pages":"Article 105906"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From novice to proficient: Comparing veterinary student learning curves of tonometry using TonoPen, TonoVet and TonoVet Plus\",\"authors\":\"Dikla Arad,&nbsp;Lionel Sebbag,&nbsp;Karin W. Handel,&nbsp;Yamit Soueid,&nbsp;Bar Fruchter,&nbsp;Noya Aharon,&nbsp;Oren Pe'er,&nbsp;Ron Ofri\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rvsc.2025.105906\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Our aim was to compare learning curves of final year veterinary students using three commonly-used tonometers for measuring intraocular pressure (IOP) in dogs: TonoPen XL (TP), TonoVet (TV), and TonoVet Plus (TVP). Students were randomly assigned to use one of the tonometers, and their performance metrics (IOP readings, number of attempts and time required to obtain a valid reading) were recorded over a one-week period and compared to those of experienced clinicians. Tonometry data were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models, and student-clinician IOP agreement was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). In the TVP group (<em>n</em> = 39), students took the longest to measure (+9.1 s compared to clinicians, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001), showed a non-significant trend toward time improvement (reduction ≤0.5 s/test, <em>p</em> ≥ 0.095), and demonstrated the highest agreement with clinicians (ICC = 0.71). In the TV group (<em>n</em> = 38), students took longer to measure than with TP and less time than with TVP (+6.9 s, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001) but had significant improvement in measurement time (reduction of 1.03 s/test, <em>p</em> = 0.023) and moderate agreement (ICC = 0.68). In the TP group (<em>n</em> = 37), students were fastest (+5.7 s, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001) and required fewer attempts to obtain valid readings (reduction of 0.056 attempts/eye, <em>p</em> = 0.015), though this group had the lowest student-clinician agreement (ICC = 0.53). Our results show that student performance improved with all tonometers. TP demonstrated the shortest learning curve but had the poorest agreement with clinician measurements. TVP yielded the best agreement but required a longer learning curve. TV offered a balance between learning curve and measurement consistency. These findings highlight the distinct learning characteristics of each device and can improve targeted training strategies in veterinary education.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21083,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research in veterinary science\",\"volume\":\"196 \",\"pages\":\"Article 105906\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research in veterinary science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0034528825003807\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in veterinary science","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0034528825003807","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们的目的是比较兽医专业毕业班学生使用TonoPen XL (TP)、TonoVet (TV)和TonoVet Plus (TVP)三种常用眼压计测量狗的眼压(IOP)的学习曲线。学生被随机分配使用其中一种眼压计,他们的表现指标(眼压读数、尝试次数和获得有效读数所需的时间)在一周内被记录下来,并与经验丰富的临床医生进行比较。使用线性混合效应模型分析眼压测量数据,并使用类内相关系数(ICC)评估学生与临床医生的眼压一致性。在TVP组(n = 39)中,学生测量时间最长(与临床医生相比为+9.1 s, p < 0.001),时间改善趋势不显著(减少≤0.5 s/次,p≥0.095),与临床医生的一致性最高(ICC = 0.71)。在电视组(n = 38)中,学生的测量时间比TP组长,比TVP组短(+6.9 s, p < 0.001),但测量时间显著改善(减少1.03 s/test, p = 0.023),一致性中等(ICC = 0.68)。在TP组(n = 37)中,学生最快(+5.7 s, p < 0.001),并且需要更少的尝试来获得有效读数(减少0.056次/眼,p = 0.015),尽管该组的学生与临床医生的一致性最低(ICC = 0.53)。我们的结果表明,使用所有的眼压计,学生的成绩都有所提高。TP表现出最短的学习曲线,但与临床测量结果的一致性最差。TVP产生了最好的协议,但需要更长的学习曲线。电视提供了学习曲线和测量一致性之间的平衡。这些发现突出了每种设备的独特学习特征,可以提高兽医教育的针对性培训策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
From novice to proficient: Comparing veterinary student learning curves of tonometry using TonoPen, TonoVet and TonoVet Plus
Our aim was to compare learning curves of final year veterinary students using three commonly-used tonometers for measuring intraocular pressure (IOP) in dogs: TonoPen XL (TP), TonoVet (TV), and TonoVet Plus (TVP). Students were randomly assigned to use one of the tonometers, and their performance metrics (IOP readings, number of attempts and time required to obtain a valid reading) were recorded over a one-week period and compared to those of experienced clinicians. Tonometry data were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models, and student-clinician IOP agreement was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). In the TVP group (n = 39), students took the longest to measure (+9.1 s compared to clinicians, p < 0.001), showed a non-significant trend toward time improvement (reduction ≤0.5 s/test, p ≥ 0.095), and demonstrated the highest agreement with clinicians (ICC = 0.71). In the TV group (n = 38), students took longer to measure than with TP and less time than with TVP (+6.9 s, p < 0.001) but had significant improvement in measurement time (reduction of 1.03 s/test, p = 0.023) and moderate agreement (ICC = 0.68). In the TP group (n = 37), students were fastest (+5.7 s, p < 0.001) and required fewer attempts to obtain valid readings (reduction of 0.056 attempts/eye, p = 0.015), though this group had the lowest student-clinician agreement (ICC = 0.53). Our results show that student performance improved with all tonometers. TP demonstrated the shortest learning curve but had the poorest agreement with clinician measurements. TVP yielded the best agreement but required a longer learning curve. TV offered a balance between learning curve and measurement consistency. These findings highlight the distinct learning characteristics of each device and can improve targeted training strategies in veterinary education.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Research in veterinary science
Research in veterinary science 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
4.20%
发文量
312
审稿时长
75 days
期刊介绍: Research in Veterinary Science is an International multi-disciplinary journal publishing original articles, reviews and short communications of a high scientific and ethical standard in all aspects of veterinary and biomedical research. The primary aim of the journal is to inform veterinary and biomedical scientists of significant advances in veterinary and related research through prompt publication and dissemination. Secondly, the journal aims to provide a general multi-disciplinary forum for discussion and debate of news and issues concerning veterinary science. Thirdly, to promote the dissemination of knowledge to a broader range of professions, globally. High quality papers on all species of animals are considered, particularly those considered to be of high scientific importance and originality, and with interdisciplinary interest. The journal encourages papers providing results that have clear implications for understanding disease pathogenesis and for the development of control measures or treatments, as well as those dealing with a comparative biomedical approach, which represents a substantial improvement to animal and human health. Studies without a robust scientific hypothesis or that are preliminary, or of weak originality, as well as negative results, are not appropriate for the journal. Furthermore, observational approaches, case studies or field reports lacking an advancement in general knowledge do not fall within the scope of the journal.
×
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