Table 4 Two- week follow-up evaluation (N = 59)
From: Mixed reality simulation for peripheral intravenous catheter placement training
n (%) | |
|---|---|
#Numbe of PIVCs since using MR | |
None | 11(18.6) |
1–5 | 15 (25.4) |
6–10 | 14 (23.7) |
11–20 | 8 (13.6) |
> 20 | 11 (18.6) |
*Successful PIVC placements since using MR | |
0–25% | 0 (0.0) |
26–50% | 1 (1.7) |
51–75% | 8 (13.8) |
76–100% | 37 (63.8) |
*PIVC Success compared with Pre-MR experience | |
Worse | 0 (0.0) |
About the same | 42 (71.2) |
Better | 7 (11.9) |
*How confident with PIVC since using MR | |
Less confident than before | 0 (0.0) |
About the same as before | 45 (84.9) |
More confident than before | 7 (13.2) |
MR useful in improving overall PIVC placement experience | |
Strongly disagree | 3 (5.1) |
Disagree | 8 (13.6) |
Neither disagree nor agree | 23 (39.0) |
Agree | 24 (40.7) |
Strongly agree | 1 (1.7) |
MR trainer good adjunct to ultrasound | |
Strongly disagree | 0 (0.0) |
Disagree | 0 (0.0) |
Neither disagree nor agree | 9 (15.3 |
Agree | 33 (55.9) |
Strongly agree | 17 (28.8) |