The presented learning curves and recognition rates suggest that the established guidelines can be used as a valid and easy-to-learn tool for teaching of MSUS.
Further large-scale research has to be done to proof significant benefits of examination and documentation with MicroV ids-Guidelines,
as well as the diagnostic value of reporting with MicroVids-Guidelines.
Despite good availability of literature on MSUS in general,
the community is still lacking well-thought-out clinical approaches aiming at the standardization and algorithmization of examinations.
Significant developments have been achieved by the rheumatologic scientific community rather than by radiologic research groups on ultrasound,
e.g.
by the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) since 1998.
This study on standardized undergraduate education in MSUS concurs with other groups’ findings regarding the educational benefits of US.
We clearly showed that MSUS can be taught to undergraduate medical students without US-related knowledge.
Considering the efforts of Knobe et al to prove the ease of use of ultrasound by comparing student tutors and expert teachers in a practical US workshop setting,
we expect that the widespread use of guidelines in early study years might help to eliminate doubts of the hard evidence for sonography as diagnostic method.
Our untrained population showed good theoretical and practical progress within short time.
The detectable,
though not statistically significant,
increase in the score of the first set of exam questions from first to second exam date suggests a positive impact on US training between the two test moments.
The evaluation of documentation with MicroVids showed shorter duration of standardized examinations as well as higher degree of transition of information.
Though,
these claims were non-significant in this study,
which most probably resulted as product of several population-related circumstances (e.g.
students had different baseline anatomic knowledge,
due to their different study progress and home universities).
However,
our results of a pilot study as well as the current data suggest MicroVids to be the superior method compared to static documentation in both educational and diagnostic settings.
Nonetheless,
we didn't expect the untrained population to have that good recognition rates when asking rather for tissue types and general orientation than for exact landmarks (A self-test can be done by interpreting the attached US images and videos (Fig.
- Fig.).
In summary,
MicroVids-guidelines most probably will be a useful tool for standardization of MSUS,
but further research has to be conducted to proof its diagnostic benefits.