EDP Sciences logo
Authentification abonné
Rechercher
Menu
Accueil Tous les numéros Volume 23 / Numéro 2 (2022) Pédagogie Médicale, 23 2 (2022) 115-123 Références
Accès gratuit
Numéro
Pédagogie Médicale
Volume 23, Numéro 2, 2022
Page(s) 115 - 123
Section Recherche et Perspectives
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/pmed/2022010
Publié en ligne 2 août 2022
  1. Soni NJ, Lucas BP. Diagnostic point-of-care ultrasound for hospitalists. J Hosp Med 2015;10:120–4. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Morgan BB, Kao A, Trent SA, Hurst N, Oliveira L, Austin AL, et al. Effect of emergency physician-performed point-of-care ultrasound and radiology department-performed ultrasound examinations on the emergency department length of stay among pregnant women at less than 20 weeks’ gestation. J Ultrasound Med 2018;37:2497–505. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Vinayak S, Sande J, Nisenbaum H, Nolsøe CP. Training midwives to perform basic obstetric point-of-care ultrasound in rural areas using a tablet platform and mobile phone transmission technology – A WFUMB COE Project. Ultrasound Med Biol 2017;43:2125–32. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Shah S, Adedipe A, Ruffatto B, Backlund BH, Sajed D, Rood K, et al. BE-SAFE: Bedside sonography for assessment of the fetus in emergencies: educational intervention for late-pregnancy obstetric ultrasound. West J Emerg Med 2014;15:636–40. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Moore CL, Copel JA. Point-of-care ultrasonography. N Engl J Med 2011;364:749–57. [Google Scholar]
  6. Jensen JK, Dyre L, Jørgensen ME, Andreasen LA, Tolsgaard MG. Simulation-based point-of-care ultrasound training: a matter of competency rather than volume. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2018;62:811–9. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Østergaard ML, Rue Nielsen K, Albrecht-Beste E, Kjær Ersbøll A, Konge L, Bachmann Nielsen M. Simulator training improves ultrasound scanning performance on patients: a randomized controlled trial. Eur Radiol 2019;29:3210–8. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Girault A. Term prelabor rupture of membranes: CNGOF guidelines for clinical practice – Methods for inducing labor. Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol 2020;48:48–58. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Youssef A, Ghi T, Pilu G. How to perform ultrasound in labor: assessment of fetal occiput position. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013;41:476–8. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Vayssière C, Haumonte J-B, Chantry A, Coatleven F, Debord MP, Gomez C, et al. Prolonged and post-term pregnancies: guidelines for clinical practice from the French College of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (CNGOF). Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2013;169:10–6. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Sherer DM. Intrapartum ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2007;30:123–39. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Haute Autorité de Santé (HAS). Mesure de la longueur du col de l’utérus par échographie endovaginale. Saint-Denis La Plaine: HAS, 2010 [On-line]. Disponible sur: https://www.has-sante.fr/upload/docs/application/pdf/2010-12/mesure_de_la_longueur_du_col_de_luterus_par_echographie_endovaginale_-_rapport.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  13. Youssef A, Ghi T, Pilu G. How to perform ultrasound in labor: assessment of fetal occiput position. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013;41:76–8. [Google Scholar]
  14. Sherer DM. Intrapartum ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2007;30:123–39. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Vintzileos AM, Chavez MR, Kinzler WL. Use of ultrasound in the labor and delivery. J Matern-Fetal Neonatal 2010;23:469–75. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Riethmuller D, Roth P, Martin A, Maillet R, Schaal J-P. Benefits of ultrasonography in the delivery room. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 2004;32:427–32. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Viossat P, Dommergues M, Lansac J. Report of the French « Conférence nationale de l’échographie obstétricale et fœtale » (CNEOF) – recommendations for focused prenatal ultrasound. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 2015;43:469–71. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Bertholdt C, Gauchotte E, Dap M, Perdriolle-Galet E, Morel O. Predictors of successful manual rotation for occiput posterior positions. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2019;144:210–5. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Rozenberg P, Porcher R, Salomon LJ, Boirot F, Morin C, Ville Y. Comparison of the learning curves of digital examination and transabdominal sonography for the determination of fetal head position during labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008;31:332–7. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Zimmermann R, Mousty E, Mares P, Letouzey V, Huberlant S. E-learning et simulation en échographie focalisée pour la formation continue des sages-femmes en salle de naissance. Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol 2019;47:836–40. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Di Pasquo E, Ramirez Zegarra R, Kiener AJO, Gobbi L, Dall’Asta A, Fieschi L, et al. Usefulness of an Intrapartum Ultrasound Simulator (IUSimTM) for midwife training: results from an RCT. Fetal Diagn Ther 2021;48:120–7. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Biau DJ, Williams SM, Schlup MM, Nizard RS, Porcher R. Quantitative and individualized assessment of the learning curve using LC-CUSUM. Br J Surg 2008;95:925–9. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Bertholdt C, Morel O, Zuily S, Ambroise-Grandjean G. Manual rotation of occiput posterior or transverse positions: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2021;S0002937821012308. [Google Scholar]
  24. Tolsgaard MG, Tabor A, Madsen ME, Wulff CB, Dyre L, Ringsted C, et al. Linking quality of care and training costs: cost-effectiveness in health professions education. Med Educ 2015; 49:1263–71. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Weerasinghe S, Mirghani H, Revel A, Abu-Zidan FM. Cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis in the assessment of trainee competence in fetal biometry measurement. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2006;28:199–203. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Vayssière C, Morinière C, Camus E, Le Strat Y, Poty L, Fermanian J, et al. Measuring cervical length with ultrasound: evaluation of the procedures and duration of a learning method. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002;20:575–9. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Balsyte D, Schäffer L, Burkhardt T, Wisser J, Zimmermann R, Kurmanavicius J. Continuous independent quality control for fetal ultrasound biometry provided by the cumulative summation technique. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2010;35:449–55. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Peyrony O, Legay L, Morra I, Verrat A, Milacic H, Franchitti J, et al. Monitoring personalized learning curves for emergency ultrasound with risk-adjusted learning-curve cumulative summation method. AEM Educ Train 2018;2:10–4. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Goldkamp J, Vricella L, Mostello D, Tomlinson T. Ultrasound feedback training increases trainee accuracy and confidence in vaginal assessment of fetal head position in labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2020;55:530–55. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Les statistiques affichées correspondent au cumul d'une part des vues des résumés de l'article et d'autre part des vues et téléchargements de l'article plein-texte (PDF, Full-HTML, ePub... selon les formats disponibles) sur la platefome Vision4Press.

Les statistiques sont disponibles avec un délai de 48 à 96 heures et sont mises à jour quotidiennement en semaine.

Le chargement des statistiques peut être long.