Table 4.
Participants’ Reactions to Simulator Training for the Supraclavicular Approach to the Subclavian Vein
| Real-time visualization | Delayed visualization | All participants | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Survey item | Agreea | Strongly agree | Mean (SD) | Agree | Strongly agree | Mean (SD) | Agree | Strongly agree | Mean (SD) |
| Experience on this simulator could be useful in clinical practice for supraclavicular approach to obtaining subclavian central venous access. | 33.3% | 66.7% | 4.67 (0.48) | 12.0% | 88.0% | 4.88 (0.33) | 25.4% | 74.6% | 4.75 (0.44) |
| The simulator should be used as a training/education tool to teach residents the supraclavicular technique of subclavian central venous access. | 29.3% | 70.7% | 4.71 (0.46) | 4.0% | 96.0% | 4.96 (0.20) | 19.7% | 80.3% | 4.80 (0.40) |
| The training received with the simulator improved my technical proficiency in supraclavicular technique of subclavian central venous access. | 28.6% | 71.4% | 4.71 (0.46) | 8.0% | 92.0% | 4.92 (0.28) | 20.9% | 79.1% | 4.79 (0.41) |
| Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | No | ||||
| Do you think that this experience with the simulator will help you perform supraclavicular technique for subclavian central venous access. | 95.2% | 4.8% | 96.0% | 4.0% | 95.5% | 4.5% | |||
a
Response options for these questions evaluating the simulator training used a scale with five response options:
1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly agree
For all questions in Table 2, there were no responses that weren’t 4 or 5.