Prospective comparison of static versus dynamic images in abdominal ultrasound education : a randomised controlled trial

dc.contributor.authorWeimer, Johannes Matthias
dc.contributor.authorEigenseher, Michael
dc.contributor.authorStiehl, Simon Alexander
dc.contributor.authorNürnberg, Dieter
dc.contributor.authorLudwig, Michael
dc.contributor.authorStäuber, Marie
dc.contributor.authorWeimer, Andreas
dc.contributor.authorKloeckner, Roman
dc.contributor.authorDirks, Klaus
dc.contributor.authorLorenz, Liv
dc.contributor.authorBuggenhangen, Holger
dc.contributor.authorWeinmann-Menke, Julia
dc.contributor.authorMerkel, Daniel
dc.date.accessioned2025-12-05T10:08:35Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.description.abstractIntroduction In medical ultrasound education, static and dynamic images help learners to understand sonoanatomical and sonopathological findings. However, there is currently no clear evidence or recommendations from professional associations regarding which presentation format is more effective for developing ultrasound competencies. This prospective, randomised, controlled study aimed to investigate the impact of static versus dynamic ultrasound images on learners’ acquisition of theoretical competencies in abdominal sonography. Methods Participants in certified ultrasound courses were randomised into two groups following an introductory session on ultrasound basics. Separately, both groups completed training covering normal findings and pathologies of the gallbladder, the liver and the pancreas. The study group underwent a digital training session (18 min total) for each of the three topics using dynamic images (video clips) while the control group received the same training session using static images. After the training, participants of both groups completed an online multiple-choice theory test, consisting of 54 questions with 4 answer options per question. Results A total of 145 datasets (69 control group, 76 study group) were included in the analysis. The study group achieved significantly higher overall theory test scores (p = 0.001) and performed significantly better in the total score of pathology findings (p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in the total score of normal findings (p = 0.08). Multivariate regression analysis identified “group allocation dynamic,” “experience with > 30 ultrasound examinations,” and “employment in internal medicine” as significant positive predictors (p < 0.01) of theory test performance. Conclusion Dynamic images in ultrasound education improve comprehension of pathological findings over static images. These insights should inform the development and adaptation of future training programs and educational materials to enhance the quality of ultrasound education and diagnostic accuracy.en_GB
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.25358/openscience-13822
dc.identifier.urihttps://openscience.ub.uni-mainz.de/handle/20.500.12030/13843
dc.language.isoeng
dc.rightsCC-BY-4.0
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subject.ddc610 Medizinde_DE
dc.subject.ddc610 Medical sciencesen_GB
dc.titleProspective comparison of static versus dynamic images in abdominal ultrasound education : a randomised controlled trialen_GB
dc.typeZeitschriftenaufsatzde_DE
jgu.apc.netprice1643,24
jgu.apc.price1758,27
jgu.apc.taxrate7
jgu.apc.transformationcontractSpringer (DEAL)
jgu.dfg.year2025
jgu.identifier.uuid38b91ce8-171f-4cca-afe7-9768ac19ec26
jgu.journal.titleBMC medical education
jgu.journal.volume25
jgu.nationalcurrency.eur1643,24
jgu.organisation.departmentFB 04 Medizinde_DE
jgu.organisation.nameJohannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainzde_DE
jgu.organisation.number2700
jgu.organisation.placeMainz
jgu.organisation.rorhttps://ror.org/023b0x485
jgu.pages.alternative1102
jgu.publisher.doi10.1186/s12909-025-07711-9
jgu.publisher.eissn1472-6920
jgu.publisher.nameBiomed Central
jgu.publisher.placeLondon
jgu.publisher.year2025
jgu.rights.accessrightsopenAccessen_GB
jgu.subject.ddccode610
jgu.subject.dfgLebenswissenschaftende_DE
jgu.type.dinitypeArticleen_GB
jgu.type.resourceTexten_GB
jgu.type.versionPublished versionen_GB

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
prospective_comparison_of_sta-20251205110835687267.pdf
Size:
2.59 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
5.14 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:

Collections