A randomised controlled trial of SAFMEDS to improve musculoskeletal radiology interpretation

A call for improving of musculoskeletal education on physical medicine and rehabilitation studies: a systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The incidence of musculoskeletal diseases is increasing in clinical practice, leading to a growing demand for rehabilitation medicine. However, education in musculoskeletal education is lacking in the training of physical medicine and rehabilitation students. This study aims to evaluate the impact of musculoskeletal education on medical students' learning of rehabilitation medicine and analyze the correlation between influencing factors and education.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of musculoskeletal education on medical students' learning of rehabilitation medicine. Furthermore, the authors aim to analyze the correlation between various influencing factors and the effectiveness of this education, with the goal of informing future educational interventions and enhancing student outcomes.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted across the Pubmed, Ovid, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases for relevant articles published from January 2012 to September 2024. The search focused on medical students as the research subjects and musculoskeletal education as the intervention method. Both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled trials (non-RCTs) were included. The selected studies underwent a systematic review, and meta-analysis was performed using R 3.4.4 software.

RESULTS

After a thorough search, 41 studies were included. The retrospective study indicated that the most common impacts were knowledge acquisition, self-confidence, and satisfaction. The subsequent meta-analysis revealed significant increases in students' knowledge acquisition [standardized mean differences (SMD) = 2.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] (1.36, 2.94), I2 = 97%, random effect model] and self-confidence [SMD = 5.81, 95% CI (2.88, 8.75), I2 = 97%, random effect model]. Compared with the general teaching control group, the knowledge acquisition of students in the observation group improved [SMD = 0.25, 95% CI (0.00, 0.51), I2 = 83%, in the random effect model]; However, no significant difference in satisfaction occurred [SMD = 0.27, 95% CI (-0.47, 1.01), P > 0.05, I2 = 89%, in the random effects model].

CONCLUSION

Musculoskeletal education primarily impacts knowledge acquisition self-confidence, and satisfaction among physical medicine and rehabilitation students. The meta-analysis further establishes that musculoskeletal education significantly enhances knowledge acquisition and confidence in these students.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CRD42024563899 (completed on July 17, 2024).

What works in radiology education for medical students: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Medical imaging related knowledge and skills are widely used in clinical practice. However, radiology teaching methods and resultant knowledge among medical students and junior doctors is variable. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to compare the impact of different components of radiology teaching methods (active versus passive teaching, eLearning versus traditional face-to-face teaching) on radiology knowledge / skills of medical students.

METHODS

PubMed and Scopus databases were searched for articles published in English over a 15-year period ending in June 2021 quantitatively comparing the effectiveness of undergraduate medical radiology education programs regarding acquisition of knowledge and/or skills. Study quality was appraised by the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) scoring and analyses performed to assess for risk of bias. A random effects meta-analysis was performed to pool weighted effect sizes across studies and I2 statistics quantified heterogeneity. A meta-regression analysis was performed to assess for sources of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

From 3,052 articles, 40 articles involving 6,242 medical students met inclusion criteria. Median MERSQI score of the included articles was 13 out of 18 possible with moderate degree of heterogeneity (I2 = 93.42%). Thematic analysis suggests trends toward synergisms between radiology and anatomy teaching, active learning producing superior knowledge gains compared with passive learning and eLearning producing equivalent learning gains to face-to-face teaching. No significant differences were detected in the effectiveness of methods of radiology education. However, when considered with the thematic analysis, eLearning is at least equivalent to traditional face-to-face teaching and could be synergistic.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies of educational interventions are inherently heterogeneous and contextual, typically tailored to specific groups of students. Thus, we could not draw definitive conclusion about effectiveness of the various radiology education interventions based on the currently available data. Better standardisation in the design and implementation of radiology educational interventions and design of radiology education research are needed to understand aspects of educational design and delivery that are optimal for learning.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prospero registration number CRD42022298607.

Inter-rater reliability of retrograde urethrograms

PURPOSE

Reliability of pre-operative testing is important for adequate surgical planning. For urethral stricture disease, preoperative planning frequently includes retrograde urethrogram (RUG). The radiographic interpretation of RUGs is often done by urologists themselves. We aimed to evaluate the reliability of RUG interpretation by urologists at our institution.

METHODS

We examined the RUGs of 193 patients. These were deidentified and interpreted by three urologists, two general urologists and one reconstructive urologist. These interpretations were compared in 2 ways. Each of the general urologists was compared to the "gold standard" reconstructive urologist interpretation, and the general urologists were additionally compared to each other. We used intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for numerical variables and Fleiss' Kappa or Cohen's Kappa statistic (κ) for categorical variables to rate inter-interpreter reliability and agreement among interpretations with regards to the quantitative variables of stricture length and caliber.

RESULTS

Level of agreement ranged from poor to moderate across all variables interpreted. Comparing general urologists to the gold standard yielded no better than moderate agreement, with the majority being poor to fair. Similarly, agreement amongst the general urologists did not reach above moderate, with the majority being poor to slight.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the first analysis of inter-rater reliability of RUGs among practicing urologists. Our analysis showed clinically unacceptable reliability with regards to stricture length, location, caliber, and indicated procedures. This study suggests a need for standardized interpretation of RUGs and poses an opportunity for actionable improvement in management of strictures.