Poster Session 1
Category: Education/Simulation
Poster Session 1
Cecilia Leggett, MD
MFM Fellow
Stanford University School of Medicine
Palo Alto, California, United States
Saumaya Sao
Stanford University School of Medicine
Stanford, California, United States
Alexandra C. Gallagher, MD (she/her/hers)
Maternal-Fetal Medicine Fellow Physician
Stanford University
Palo Alto, California, United States
Jane Chueh, MD
Clinical Professor
Stanford University
Stanford University, California, United States
Elizabeth B. Sherwin, MPH (she/her/hers)
Biostatistician
Stanford University
Stanford, California, United States
Irogue I. Igbinosa, MD, MS (she/her/hers)
Stanford University
Stanford, California, United States
Erica Wu, MD
Stanford University
Stanford University, California, United States
Emi Komatsu
Stanford University
Stanford University, California, United States
Amy Judy, MD
Clinical Assistant Professor
Stanford University
Stanford University, California, United States
A prospective, randomized controlled trial was conducted at an urban academic center from January-June 2025. OBGYN trainees on a labor and delivery rotation were randomized to either a pocket probe (Butterfly iQ3) that connected to personal devices for image display or traditional ultrasound machines (GE Voluson P8) available on the unit. All participants received a digital obstetric ultrasound curriculum.
The primary outcome was curriculum completion measured by number and type of scans performed. 7 participants per group were needed to detect a mean difference of 18% (alpha 0.05).
Secondary outcomes included knowledge assessment scores, image quality, and perceived workload assessed by a validated survey (NASA Task Load Index). Mann-Whitney, paired T-tests, and chi-square tests were used for analysis.
23 trainees were enrolled (13 pocket, 10 traditional). Groups were similar in age, training year, pre-curriculum scores, and shift schedules.
The pocket group had significantly higher curriculum completion (median 67% vs 8.3%, p=0.0016, Figure 1). Image quality scores were significantly higher in the pocket group (4.0 vs 3.0, p=0.0003). Post-curriculum knowledge scores were not significantly different between groups.
The pocket group more often rated workload as low/moderate, while controls rated workload high/very high (p=0.046).Lower mental, physical, temporal demand, and lower frustration were seen among those randomized to pocket probes (Figure 2).