Medical Student POCUS Peer-to-Peer Teaching: Ready for Mainstream

Authors

  • Mazen El-Baba University of Toronto
  • Kathryn Corbett University of Toronto
  • Kate Dillon University of Toronto
  • Claire Heslop University of Toronto

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/ijms.2021.700

Keywords:

POCUS, ultrasound, ultrasound training, peer-to-peer, undergraduate medicine

Abstract

Background: Point of care ultrasound (POCUS) is changing the face of clinical practice and medical education. Worldwide consensus based on expert opinion has advocated for POCUS teaching in undergraduate medical school curricula. Significant barriers, including lack of available instructors and limited resources, prevents medical learners from acquiring core competencies at most institutions. Here, we describe a peer-to-peer learning POCUS workshop and advocate for the use of this type of training to meet the demands of POCUS learning.

Methods: A two-day POCUS workshop was held in Toronto, Ontario with twenty-six medical student participants. The workshop was structured according to a graduated model of POCUS skill development, beginning with didactic teaching, then progressing to hands-on peer-to-peer teaching, and finishing with competency evaluation by POCUS experts. Participants completed pre-and post-workshop surveys regarding prior POCUS teaching and exposure, self-reported skill development, and feedback on the workshop itself.

Results: Of the 20 respondents to the questionnaire, 70% had prior POCUS exposure, with 85% of these individuals having less than 5 hours of prior POCUS education. Eighty-five percent of students reported that the organization of the course allowed them to participate fully, and 95% of participants indicated that peer-to-peer learning was effective.

Conclusion: These findings suggest that peer-to-peer POCUS teaching is an effective learning method to acquire and consolidate well-established POCUS competencies. This initiative is scalable and could be applied to all learners in various disciplines. As such, we recommend medical schools consider integration of peer-to-peer POCUS teaching into longitudinal clerkship training programs, and transition-to-residency courses.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Moore CL, Copel JA. Point-of-Care Ultrasonography. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(8):749–57. doi:10.1056/NEJMra0909487.

Leidi A, Rouyer F, Marti C, et al. Point of care ultrasonography from the emergency department to the internal medicine ward: current trends and perspectives. Intern Emerg Med. 2020;15(3):1-14. doi:10.1007/s11739-020-02284-5.

Lee SH, Yun SJ. Diagnostic performance of emergency physician-performed point-of-care ultrasonography for acute appendicitis: A meta-analysis. Am J Emerg Med. 2019;37(4):696-705. doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2018.07.025.

Chartier LB, Bosco L, Lapointe-Shaw L, et al. Use of point-of-care ultrasound in long bone fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. CJEM. 2017;19(2):131-142. doi:10.1017/cem.2016.397.

Smallwood N, Dachsel M. Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS): unnecessary gadgetry or evidence-based medicine?. Clin Med (Lond). 2018;18(3):219‐224. doi:10.7861/clinmedicine.18-3-219.

Ma IWY, Steinmetz P, Weerdenburg K, et al. The Canadian Medical Student Ultrasound Curriculum. J Ultrasound Med. 2020;64(10):e462-e467. doi:10.1002/jum.15218

Torres-Macho J, Aro T, Bruckner I, et al. Point-of-care ultrasound in internal medicine: A position paper by the ultrasound working group of the European federation of internal medicine. Eur J Intern Med. 2020;73:67-71. doi:10.1016/j.ejim.2019.11.016.

Dandavino M, Snell L, Wiseman J. Why medical students should learn how to teach. Med Teach. 2007;29(6):558–65. doi:10.1080/01421590701477449.

Harrison CH, Elmansouri A, Parton W, et al. The Efficacy of Frontline Near-Peer Teaching in a Modern Medical Curriculum. Anat Sci Educ. 2019;12(3):236-244. doi:10.1002/ase.1827.

Durán CEP., Bahena EN, Rodríguez, MDLÁG, et al. Near-peer teaching in an anatomy course with a low faculty‐to‐student ratio. Anat Sci Educ. 2012;5(3):171-176. doi:10.1002/ase.1269.

Stigmar M. Peer-to-Peer teaching in higher education: A critical literature review. Mentoring & Tutoring: partnership in learning. 2016;24(2):124-136. doi:10.1080/13611267.2016.1178963.

Evans DJ, Cuffe T. Near-peer teaching in anatomy: An approach for deeper learning. Anat Sci Edu. 2009;2(5):227-233. doi:10.1002/ase.110.

Bhagra A, Tierney DM, Sekiguchi H, et al. Point-of-Care Ultrasonography for Primary Care Physicians and General Internists. Mayo Clin Proc. 2016;91(12):1811-1827. doi:10.1016/j.mayocp.2016.08.023.

Marton GE, McCullough B, Ramnanan CJ. A review of teaching skills development programmes for medical students. Med Educ. 2015;49(2):149-160. doi:10.1111/medu.12571.

Rees EL, Quinn PJ, Davies B, et al. How does peer teaching compare to faculty teaching? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Med Teach. 2016;38(8):829–37. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2015.1112888.

Olaussen A, Reddy P, Irvine S. Peer-assisted learning: time for nomenclature clarification. Med Educ Online. 2016;21(1):30974. doi:10.3402/meo.v21.30974.

Nestel D, Kidd J. Peer assisted learning in patient-centred interviewing: the impact on student tutors. Med Teach. 2005;27(5):439-444. doi:10.1080/01421590500086813.

Lewis D, Rang L, Kim D, et al. Recommendations for the use of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) by emergency physicians in Canada. CJEM. 2019;21(6):721-726. doi:10.1017/cem.2019.392

Cartier RA, Skinner C, Laselle B. Perceived Effectiveness of Teaching Methods for Point of Care Ultrasound. J Emerg Med. 2014;47(1):86-91. doi:10.1016/j.jemermed.2014.01.027.

Downloads

Published

2021-04-29

How to Cite

El-Baba, M., Corbett, K., Dillon, K., & Heslop, C. (2021). Medical Student POCUS Peer-to-Peer Teaching: Ready for Mainstream . International Journal of Medical Students, 9(1), 11–14. https://doi.org/10.5195/ijms.2021.700

Issue

Vol. 9 No. 1 (2021)

Section

Original Article

Categories

License

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
    1. Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site; with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
    2. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
    3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
    4. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
    5. The Author represents and warrants that:
      1. the Work is the Author’s original work;
      2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
      3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
      4. the Work has not previously been published;
      5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
      6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
    6. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from the Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.

Enforcement of copyright

The IJMS takes the protection of copyright very seriously.

If the IJMS discovers that you have used its copyright materials in contravention of the license above, the IJMS may bring legal proceedings against you seeking reparation and an injunction to stop you using those materials. You could also be ordered to pay legal costs.

If you become aware of any use of the IJMS' copyright materials that contravenes or may contravene the license above, please report this by email to contact@ijms.org

 

Infringing material

If you become aware of any material on the website that you believe infringes your or any other person's copyright, please report this by email to contact@ijms.org