International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2021
Development of a self-directed sinonasal surgical anatomy video curriculum: Phase 1 validation.
Клиническое исследование I фазыСтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bailey C Eric, Grauer Jordan S, Chen Philip G, Rangarajan Sanjeet V, Chan Yvonne, Tewfik Marc A, Marino Michael J, Torabi Mohammad, Le Christopher H, Chang Eugene H
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Sinusitis is a common outpatient diagnosis made by physicians and is a reason for referral to otolaryngologists. A foundation in basic sinonasal anatomy is critical in understanding sinus pathophysiology and avoiding complications. Our objective in this study was to develop and to validate a self-directed surgical anatomy video for medical students.
METHODS: Two multimedia videos were developed highlighting sinonasal anatomy. In Video 1 we included audio narration and radiologic imaging. Video 2 incorporated highlighted images from a sinus surgery video. An assessment was developed to test sinonasal anatomy landmarks, spatial recognition of structures, and their clinical relevance. An expert panel of rhinologists scored face and content validity of the curriculum videos and assessment. Factor analysis was used to separate questions into face and content validity domains, and a one-sample t test was performed.
RESULTS: The panel scored face validity (Videos 1 and 2: 4.4/5) and content validity (Video 1: 4.5/5, 0.83; Video 2: 4.3/5, 0.75) significantly higher than a neutral response. There were no statistical differences for face or content validity between videos. The assessment was rated suitable (29%) or very suitable (57%) for testing basic sinonasal surgical anatomy, and the majority (71%) of respondents agreed (14%) or strongly agreed (57%) that the assessment thoroughly covered the sinus anatomy content with which medical students should be familiar.
CONCLUSION: We have developed two videos and an assessment that highlight and test sinonasal anatomy. Future studies will aim to identify whether the use of a self-directed video curriculum improves sinonasal anatomy awareness and whether incorporation of surgical endoscopic videos augments training.
METHODS: Two multimedia videos were developed highlighting sinonasal anatomy. In Video 1 we included audio narration and radiologic imaging. Video 2 incorporated highlighted images from a sinus surgery video. An assessment was developed to test sinonasal anatomy landmarks, spatial recognition of structures, and their clinical relevance. An expert panel of rhinologists scored face and content validity of the curriculum videos and assessment. Factor analysis was used to separate questions into face and content validity domains, and a one-sample t test was performed.
RESULTS: The panel scored face validity (Videos 1 and 2: 4.4/5) and content validity (Video 1: 4.5/5, 0.83; Video 2: 4.3/5, 0.75) significantly higher than a neutral response. There were no statistical differences for face or content validity between videos. The assessment was rated suitable (29%) or very suitable (57%) for testing basic sinonasal surgical anatomy, and the majority (71%) of respondents agreed (14%) or strongly agreed (57%) that the assessment thoroughly covered the sinus anatomy content with which medical students should be familiar.
CONCLUSION: We have developed two videos and an assessment that highlight and test sinonasal anatomy. Future studies will aim to identify whether the use of a self-directed video curriculum improves sinonasal anatomy awareness and whether incorporation of surgical endoscopic videos augments training.