Table 4 Qualitative responses from the expert raters
Themes | Total number of coded responses | Percentage of coded responses | Selected responses from the raters |
|---|---|---|---|
Poor image generation and interpretation skills | 34 | 22% | “… very uncertain probe handling and image generation” “… Needs more practice, I didn’t see a good spleno-diaphragm interface + subxiphoid cardiac scan needs work, good skills but not yet competent.” |
Poor audio and/or video quality | 30 | 20% | “US images don’t match the doctor-patient images!!! Patient was situ inversus? The participant says, “I’m looking at liver, hepatorenal interface, BUT he is looking in LUQ but the image is liver (in LUQ) and spleen (in RUQ)”.” “Audio poor - can’t tell but the participant demonstrated them (apex/septum/ventricles/pericardium)” |
Poor probe handling skills | 15 | 10% | “Improper probe orientation (FAST) …” “Probe backwards (FAST). Saw everything just backwards (FAST). Probe backwards / depth (cardiac).” |
Did not verbalize findings | 22 | 14% | “Did not mention (items 7/8/9 cardiac). Did not mention (item 8 aorta). Did not verbalize multiple steps.” “Not mentioned (items 7/8/9 cardiac). Clearly comfortable but did not verbalize the images.” |