Author
Listed:
- Xavier Moisset
- Bruno Pereira
- Carole Jamet
- Alexandre Saturnin
- Pierre Clavelou
Abstract
Background: Atraumatic needles are proposed to lower complication rates after lumbar puncture (LP). Only a minority of physicians use such needles. Here we aimed to assess the impact of specific training in LP during clinical clerkship on the proportion of medical students using atraumatic needles. Methods: We performed a case-control study comparing medical students undergoing clinical clerkship and students undergoing specific LP training. The 176 students of a class underwent training in LP just before beginning their clinical rotations. This training consisted of 45 minutes of theoretical training and a 90-minute practical session with a dummy. Twenty students were selected from the class at random, and their competence was assessed with a multiple choice questionnaire (MCQ) and an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE), nine months after the specific training. These 20 cases were compared with 20 students randomly selected from a class of 180 students who had not undergone specific training in LP and were at the end of their clinical clerkship. Results: We found that 60% of the students with specific training and 25% of those with classic clinical training used an atraumatic needle during the OSCE (p = 0.025). The mean MCQ (/100) scores obtained were 57±15 and 60±15 for the specific and classic training groups, respectively (p = 0.35). Overall OSCE score was similar in the two groups (63.5±9.3 vs. 65.8±9.3; p = 0.20). Conclusion: Very few practicing physicians use atraumatic needles, which limits the teaching of their use to medical students. Specific training durably increases the use of appropriate needles.
Suggested Citation
Xavier Moisset & Bruno Pereira & Carole Jamet & Alexandre Saturnin & Pierre Clavelou, 2019.
"Specific lumbar puncture training during clinical clerkship durably increases atraumatic needle use,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-8, June.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0218004
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218004
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0218004. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.