The Role of Telehealth in Ultrasound Training for Remote Learners: A Systematic Review.

Introduction: Remote learners and educators face geographic, professional, and personal barriers that affect their access to quality ultrasound education. The integration of telehealth in ultrasound education enables learners performing ultrasound to receive real-time instruction from an educator at a distant or remote site. However, to date, there has been poor understanding of the efficacy, benefits, shortcomings, and economic impact of telehealth education in comparison to in-person ultrasound training. The aim of this research was to assess current literature on telehealth in ultrasound education and hands-on training, its outcomes and impact, and requirements for future development. Methods: This review examined international literature on telehealth in ultrasound training. The primary author and second investigator were involved in the research and reached consensus on the eligibility criteria, search strategy, included articles, data extraction, and quality assessment. Results: A total of 23 studies were obtained from Medline, Emcare and Scopus. Key themes identified: Most studies saw an equivalent improvement in knowledge and skills through pre and postassessments in both in-person and telehealth sessions. Generally, learners felt comfortable performing ultrasound guided by a remote educator and felt their skills had been advanced across all studies. Educators reported positive feedback, however compared with learners, educators expressed less satisfaction with the telehealth session. Conclusions: This study demonstrated the feasibility of telehealth in ultrasound training for remote learners with little to no experience. Quality studies with comparable outcomes are needed to ascertain the safe and effective application of telehealth in ultrasound training.

Antenatal ultrasound needs-analysis survey of Australian rural/remote healthcare clinicians: recommendations for improved service quality and access.

BACKGROUND: Ultrasound is the primary diagnostic tool in pregnancy, capable of identifying high-risk pregnancies and life-threatening conditions, allowing for appropriate management to prevent maternal and fetal morbidity and mortality. Women and babies from rural and remote Australia and low-resource areas worldwide experience poorer health outcomes and barriers to accessing antenatal care and imaging services. Healthcare clinicians working in these regions face significant challenges practising with limited resources and accessing training opportunities. OBJECTIVE: To perform an exploratory needs-analysis survey investigating the availability, accessibility and use of antenatal ultrasound in rural Australia, exploring rural clinicians' interest in and access to ultrasound training opportunities. METHODS: The survey tool for this cross-sectional study was designed and distributed as an anonymous online questionnaire targeting healthcare clinicians (doctors, nurses, midwives, clinic managers, Aboriginal healthcare workers) providing antenatal care in rural regions. Descriptive analysis was applied to quantitative data and thematic analysis was used to explore qualitative components. RESULTS: A total of 114 valid survey responses were analysed. Overall, 39% (43/111) reported ultrasound was not used when providing antenatal care to patients at their clinic, stating 'Lack of ultrasound equipment (73%,29/40) and inaccessibility of training opportunities (47%,19/40) as the main reasons. For those with ultrasound (61%,68/111), estimating due date (89%,57/64) was the main use, and limited training/skills to operate the equipment (59%,38/64) and inaccessibility/distance of training opportunities (45%,29/64) were the most commonly reported barriers. Clinicians described a lack of childcare options (73%,74/102), long distances to reach ultrasound services (64%,65/102), appointment (59%,60/102) and transport availability/times (46%,47/102) as the main obstacles to patient access. Increased attendance, compliance with care directives, parental bonding and improved lifestyle choices were described by respondents as positive outcomes of antenatal ultrasound use. CONCLUSIONS: Future efforts to combat inequitable service access must adopt a coordinated approach to meet the needs of pregnant women in low-resource settings. Providing portable ultrasound equipment, training in antenatal Point-of-Care ultrasound (PoCUS) with ongoing support/mentoring and accreditation of health professionals could strengthen rural workforce capacity. This, along with addressing the complex economic, environmental and socio-cultural barriers faced by patients, could improve service access and pregnancy outcomes in rural and remote communities.

Evaluation of antenatal point-of-care ultrasound training workshops for rural/remote healthcare clinicians: a prospective single cohort study.

BACKGROUND: There is limited access to life-saving antenatal ultrasound in low-resource rural and remote settings worldwide, including Australia, mainly due to shortages in skilled staff. Point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) offers a viable solution to this service deficit, however, rural clinicians face many barriers accessing training and professional development critical to advancing their clinical practice. Standards for PoCUS training and competency assessment are unclear. Regulation is lacking globally, allowing untrained and inexperienced clinicians to practice PoCUS clinically. METHODS: This prospective single cohort study aimed to evaluate antenatal PoCUS training workshops for General Practitioners (GPs) and Midwives/Nurses (M/Ns) from rural/remote Australia, assessing the impact of the training on trainees' knowledge, confidence and translation of PoCUS into clinical practice. Two-day antenatal ultrasound workshops were delivered at the University of South Australia (UniSA) in 2018 and 2019 to 41 rural/remote clinicians . The training was designed and evaluated using the New world Kirkpatrick Evaluation Framework. Sixteen GPs and 25 M/Ns with mixed prior ultrasound experience were funded to attend. The course consisted of lectures interspaced with hands-on training sessions using high-fidelity simulators and live pregnant models. Pre- and post-knowledge assessments were performed. Post-workshop evaluation and follow-up surveys (3- and 6-month post-training) assessed the workshops and changes to trainees' clinical practice. A 2-day follow-up training session was conducted 12 months after the workshops for 9 trainees. RESULTS: Pre/post knowledge testing demonstrated a 22% mean score improvement (95% CI 17.1 to 27.8, P < 0.0001). At 6 months, 62% of trainees were performing PoCUS that had assisted in patient management and clinical diagnosis, and 46% reported earlier diagnosis and changes to patient management. 74% of trainees had increased scanning frequency and 93% reported improved scanning confidence. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated intensive 2-day workshops can equip clinicians with valuable antenatal PoCUS skills, offering a viable solution to assist in the assessment and management of pregnant women in the rural/resource-poor setting where access to ultrasound services is limited or non-existent. Geographical isolation and lack of onsite specialist supervision poses an ongoing challenge to the continuing professional development of remote trainees and the implementation of PoCUS.

Evaluation of antenatal Point-of-Care Ultrasound (PoCUS) training: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: There is limited access to life-saving antenatal ultrasound in rural and low-resource settings largely due to shortages in skilled staff. Studies have shown healthcare practitioners can be upskilled in PoCUS through focused training, offering a viable solution to this deficit. However, standards for training and competency assessment are unclear and regulation surrounding practice is lacking. We aimed to review published literature examining antenatal PoCUS training programs, comparing teaching approaches and study methodologies. METHODS: A search of electronic databases EMBASE, MEDLINE and Google Scholar was conducted. Original research articles evaluating antenatal PoCUS training of healthcare professionals worldwide were identified for analysis. Articles with limited detail on the PoCUS training intervention and those describing comprehensive diagnostic training programs were excluded. Evaluations were compared against the Kirkpatrick Evaluation Framework (KEF). RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies were included from an initial search result of 484 articles. There was considerable heterogeneity between the PoCUS training programs described. Course duration ranged from 3 hours to 2 years, with 11 of the 27 studies delivering obstetric-exclusive content. 44% trained multidisciplinary groups of health professionals. Long-term follow-up training and skills assessments were lacking in over half of the reviewed studies. Study quality and reporting detail varied, but overall beneficial outcomes were reported with 3/4s of the studies reaching upper KEF levels 3 and 4. CONCLUSION: PoCUS performed by upskilled healthcare professionals offers an attractive solution to the problem of inequitable access to antenatal ultrasound. A review of available literature highlighted a paucity of comparable high-quality studies needed to establish a stronger evidence base for antenatal PoCUS, and a need to standardise training and competency assessment. This review may inform educators, researchers and policy-makers on existing training formats and methodologies to assist in establishing best practice antenatal PoCUS training methods for safe service delivery by remote healthcare professionals.