Ultrasound-guided facet joint injection training using Perk Tutor

  • E. Moult
  • T. Ungi
  • M. Welch
  • J. Lu
  • R. C. McGraw
  • G. Fichtinger
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

Facet syndrome is a condition that may cause 15–45 % of chronic lower back pain. It is commonly diagnosed and treated using facet joint injections. This needle technique demands high accuracy, and ultrasound (US) is a potentially useful modality to guide the needle. US-guided injections, however, require physicians to interpret 2-D sonographic images while simultaneously manipulating an US probe and needle. Therefore, US-guidance for facet joint injections needs advanced training methodologies that will equip physicians with the requisite skills.

Methods

We used Perk Tutor—an augmented reality training system for US-guided needle insertions—in a configuration for percutaneous procedures of the lumbar spine. In a pilot study of 26 pre-medical undergraduate students, we evaluated the efficacy of Perk Tutor training compared to traditional training.

Results

The Perk Tutor Trained group, which had access to Perk Tutor during training, had a mean success rate of 61.5 %, while the Control group, which received traditional training, had a mean success rate of 38.5 % (\(p = 0.031\)). No significant differences in procedure times or needle path lengths were observed between the two groups.

Conclusions

The results of this pilot study suggest that Perk Tutor provides an improved training environment for US-guided facet joint injections on a synthetic model.

Keywords

Facet joint injection Ultrasound-guidance Medical education Simulation training Perk Tutor 

References

  1. 1.
    Boswell M, Singh V, Staats PS, Hirsch JA (2003) Accuracy of precision diagnostic blocks in the diagnosis of chronic spinal pain of facet or zygapophysial joint origin: a systematic review. Pain Phys 6:449–456Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boswell M, Colson J, Sehgal N, Dunbar E, Epter R (2007) A systematic review of therapeutic facet joint interventions in chronic spinal pain. Pain Phys 10:229–253Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chen CP, Lew HL, Tsai WC, Hung YT, Hsu CC (2011) Ultrasound-guided injection techniques for the low back and hip joint. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 90:860–867PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Clarke C, Moore J, Wedlake C, Lee D, Ganapathy S, Salbalbal M, Wilson T, Peters T, Bainbridge D (2010) Virtual reality imaging with real-time ultrasound guidance for facet joint injection: a proof of concept. Anesth Analg 110:1461–1463PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fedorov A, Beichel R, Kalpathy-Cramer J, Finet J, Fillion-Robin JC, Pujol S, Bauer C, Jennings D, Fennessy F, Sonka M, Buatti J, Aylward S, Miller JV, Pieper S, Kikinis R, (2012) 3D slicer as an image computing platform for the quantitative imaging network. Magn Reson Imaging 30:1323–1341Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Galiano K, Obwegeser A, Bodner G, Freund M, Maurer H, Kamelger F, Schatzer R, Ploner F (2005) Ultrasound guidance for facet joint injections in the lumbar spine: a computed tomography-controlled feasibility study. Anesth Analg 101:579–583PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Galiano K, Obwegeser AA, Walch C, Schatzer R, Ploner F, Gruber H (2007) Ultrasound-guided versus computed tomography-controlled facet joint injections in the lumbar spine: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Reg Anesth Pain Med 32:317–322Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lasso A, Heffter T, Pinter C, Ungi T, Fichtinger G (2012) Implementation of the plus open-source toolkit for translational research of ultrasound-guided intervention systems. In: MICCAI, pp 1–12 Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ma IW, Brindle ME, Ronksley PE, Lorenzetti DL, Sauve RS, Ghali WA (2011) Use of simulation-based education to improve outcomes of central venous catheterization: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acad Med 86:1137–1147Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Magee D, Zhu Y, Ratnalingam R, Gardner P, Kessel D (2007) An augmented reality simulator for ultrasound guided needle placement training. Med Biol Eng Comput 45:957–967PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Moore J, Clarke C, Bainbridge D, Wedlake C, Wiles A, Pace D, Peters T (2009) Image guidance for spinal facet injections using tracked ultrasound. In: MICCAI vol 523, pp 516–523Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sehgal N, Dunbar EE, Shah RV, Colson J (2007) Systematic review of diagnostic utility of facet (zygapophysial) joint injections in chronic spinal pain: an update. Pain Phys 10:213–228Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tokuda J, Fischer GS, Papademetris X, Yaniv Z, Ibanez L, Cheng P, Liu H, Blevins J, Arata J, Golby AJ, Kapur T, Pieper S, Burdette EC, Fichtinger G, Tempany CM, Hata N (2009) OpenIGTLink: an open network protocol for image-guided therapy environment. Int J Med Robot 5:423–434PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ungi T, Abolmaesumi P, Jalal R, Welch M, Ayukawa I, Nagpal S, Lasso A, Jaeger M, Borschneck DP, Fichtinger G, Mousavi P (2012) Spinal needle navigation by tracked ultrasound snapshots. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 59(10):2766–2772PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ungi T, Sargent D, Moult E, Lasso A, Pinter C, McGraw R, Fichtinger G (2012) Perk Tutor: an open-source training platform for ultrasound-guided needle insertions. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 59(12):3475–3481Google Scholar

Copyright information

© CARS 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. Moult
    • 1
  • T. Ungi
    • 2
  • M. Welch
    • 2
  • J. Lu
    • 2
  • R. C. McGraw
    • 3
  • G. Fichtinger
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringQueen’s UniversityKingstonCanada
  2. 2.School of ComputingQueen’s UniversityKingstonCanada
  3. 3.School of MedicineQueen’s UniversityKingstonCanada

Personalised recommendations