presenting your research - wchri€¦ · presenting your research. today we will go over… poster...
TRANSCRIPT
Dr. CHLOE JOYNT Dr. SARAH CURTIS
c joynt@u alberta.ca scu rtis@u alberta.ca
WCHRI Lunch and Learn
2016
Presenting your Research
Today we will go over…
Poster presentation
Oral presentation
Oral Critique ( Interactive Exercise)
What to remember when designing
What to remember when presenting
Presenting …make it matter
You worked really hard for these results! What main results do you want to emphasize
What’s the one or two points you want them to remember
Why should they care? How is it relevant to your audience - Story?
How will YOU reach them Engage / incite/ educate/ entertain
Tell them what you’re going to tell them….
Tell them ….. Tell them what you told them
Earn their enthusiasm and trust
Good research can be presented badly - or well However, you are not selling lawn furniture
You are engaging thoughts...Don’t be too technical or flashy
Genuine Enthusiasm is contagious – spark their enthusiasm
Critical/ thoughtful appraisal of your work and related work will earn trust of audience Know your stuff (literature) and your slides/poster
Getting Started…
Before you start THINK about
Your Audience
Creating your slides or poster
How you communicate your findings
What questions you will anticipate
How can they get a hold of me later?
Anticipate what could go wrong?
Do your background checks
How Long Do you Have?
Instructions for Presentation (declaration/subsections)
Who is your audience? Specialized / General
Moderators
Judged
PubMED your moderators/ judges
people ask questions on things they know
Dress to respect your audience
Facilities and A/V Connections
Producing an
Academic
Poster
Preparation
Design
Content
Delivery
Answer 4 Questions:
What is the most important//astounding finding from
my research?
How can I visually share my research with
conference attendees? (Should I use charts, graphs, photos,
images?)
What kind of information can I convey during my talk
that will complement my poster?
Who is my audience?
Distill the message If you could say only 1 thing on your poster- what
would it be?
Select a sure attention grabber- statement or
graphic- first 3 seconds reader is deciding whether
to stay or leave
Enlarge the ‘3-second hit’ item to occupy at least
30% of area of finished poster
Reader won’t approach if topic/theme/message
unclear from ‘safe distance’ of 3 meters (10ft)
An Effective Poster:
Summarizes information
Concise & attractive
Publicizes results
Generates discussion
An Effective Poster:
Visual logic
Graphical
Spacious & easy to follow
Message: title, graphics, conclusion
An Effective Poster:
Shows & guides
Reader gravity
Readable 10 - 6 feet
Avoids visual chaos
Relative
importance
of
elements
graphically
Leave Space
Simple messages are
more memorable
An Effective Poster:
Minimizes text = graphs & images
Use phrases = no full sentences
Maximum 250 - 500 words
Use an active voice
Avoid jargon
Left-justify text; avoid centering/right justify
Please note: This slide has too much text!
I could have been more brief and made the
exact same points with better overall effect!
Design: Planning
Look up the poster format AHEAD of
time
Allowed poster size?
Printer/program format?
Borders and/or colors – institution template?
Logos?
When do I send to printer ?
Design:Software? PowerPoint
Adobe Illustrator, Photoshop, InDesign
Open Source Alternatives:
LibreOffice, NeoOffice, Apache OpenOffice
Inkscape and Gimp are alternatives to Adobe
products.
Gliffy or Lovely Charts - charts and diagrams
Design: Print Layout
Design your poster at the actual size
that it going to be printed. 36"h x 48"w (91 x 122 cm) 300 dpi resolution
Go to printing website to get the
scope. SUBPrint:
http://www.su.ualberta.ca/businesses/subprint/largeformat/
Design: Poster Templates
• http://www.wchri.org/poster-and-oral-presentation-
guidelines
• http://www.toolkit.ualberta.ca/Toolkit%20Downloads/Te
mplates/PosterPresentations.aspx
• http://www.toolkit.ualberta.ca/Toolkit%20Downloads/Te
mplates/PowerPoint.aspx
Content 1.Title
2.Background
3.Research Question
4.Methods
5.Results
6.Conclusion
7. Acknowledgments
Citations(optional)
How can you most clearly convey your results?
Title Short
Should draw interest
90-150 point bold
Readable from 10 feet
Format in sentence/ title case (not caps)
Most people only read titles!
Give the key message in the title!
Substance A Inhibits Production of Protein B
OR
The Effect of Substance A on Protein B
Most people only read titles!
Pose a question ?
Does Protein A inhibit Protein B?
OR
The Effect of Substance A on Protein B
Background Text clear
To the point
Bullets and/or numbers
Shows & guides key aspects
(this is not a full paper!)
Research Question Hypothesis- Brief
Primary question- Brief
Secondary questions
Tertiary questions- are they necessary here?
Ensure questions match outcome
measurements in results (graphics).
Methods
Flow Charts!
Bulleted !
Results: Graphics
Charts & Graphs
Tables - last resort!
40% of poster (at least)
Results: GraphicsClear title
Label axes
Units
Font Size!
http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2007/08/02/data-visualization-modern-
approaches/
Content: Font Style
This sentence is typed in Times New Roman, 28
This sentence is typed in Arial, 28
This sentence is typed in DIN Alternate, 28
Use sans serif: Arial, Helvetica or Calibri
Content: Font Size
Title: 90-120 pt
Subheadings: 30-32 pt
Body: 24-28 pt
Captions 18 pt minimum - aim for 24
Content: Colors Contrast light background & dark text
Avoid dark background & light text
Theme of 2-3 colours maximum!
Use consistent pattern
Avoid tricky color combinations – red/green-especially on graphics
Use color wheels- http://kuler.adobe.com
Content: Other
Consider bold, bold italics for
occasional effect
Avoid too many underlines
Delivery
Set up early (pushpins?)
Poster canister
Business cards & mini posters
Supplementary information
Practice 3 minute tour ; 2 min Q & A
Body language and dress neatly
Delivery:
Is there a formal oral presentation?
Take your time- be relative
Speak slowly
Be enthusiastic, polite and
knowledgeable
Know your audience
Neatly Dressed and Approachable
Business Cards in Hand
or Pocket
Mini Poster Available
Delivery:
Don’t read the poster!!!
Face your audienceTell them the context
Identify the big problem
Explain why the problem is important
Tell them:What you did to answer it
What the answer is
What the answer means
Poster Critiques
Overview
CHILDHOOD FRACTURES APPEAR TO BE HERITABLE: A Genetic Epidemiology Study
Sarah Curtis1 MD, FRCPC • Pat Parfrey2 MD, FRCPC • Tracey Bridger2 MD, FRCPC • Ben Vandermeer1 M.Sc. and Proton Rahman2 MD M.Sc. FRCPC
1Dept. of Pediatrics, Stollery Children s Hospital • 2Dept. of Pediatrics, Janeway Children's Hospital, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, NL, Canada
Childhood fractures are common, a significant cause of morbidity
and are costly to society. They are multifactorial in origin and result
from the imbalance between complexities of bone strength and
trauma. Both bone mineral density (BMD) and the complex micro
architectural properties of bone determine bone strength. Adult and
pediatric studies have noted that parental history of fracture and
previous fracture confer an increased risk of fracture independent of
BMD. The importance of genetic factors in childhood fractures has
not yet been evaluated. !
METHODOLOGY: Design: Case-control study!
Setting: Pediatric Emergency Department, Janeway Childrens Hospital, !
St. Johns, NL!
Study Population: Children (0-16 years); no chronic disease; NL!
!
Cases: Healthy children presenting with fracture
Controls: Fracture-free healthy children!
!
Intervention: Participants and parents were asked to complete a report form
about their medical and fracture history including information relevant to risk
factors for fracture.!
!
Sampling methods:
! Potential study subjects were identified by the emergency nurses !
! Researcher notified!
! Consent signed, information package and report form given to complete/ post
back!
!
Inclusion Criteria ! Children aged 0-16 yrs!
! Clinically documented fracture for cases!
!
Exclusion Criteria ! Chronic disease!
! Medications such as OCP, Steroids !
! Smoking/ Alcohol!
! Previous history of fracture for control group!
!
Study Dates: July & August of 2001-2004 ( total 6 months)!
!
Ethical Approval: The Human Investigation Committee (MUN)!
!
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Janeway Research Foundation for financial support Samra Mian & Sarah Matheson for data entry RP Evans for technical support
OBJECTIVES:
INTRODUCTION:
To determine if a familial tendency to fracture exists. !
To assess the relative role of environmental factors in
determination of fracture risk.
SUMMARY ! Childhood fractures appear to be heritable, a feature which is independent of the environmental risk factors for fracture.
! This study provides important evidence supporting the need to further investigate the genetic basis of common childhood fractures.
FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS ! Further expansion of this study with increased sample size, the addition of bone mineral density tests and serum markers of bone metabolism is warranted.
! This may also provide important evidence supporting the undertaking of genetic linkage studies to further understand fracture susceptibility.
RESULTS:
STUDY DATA:
Sample Size: 71 in each group!
!
Report Form: ! Designed by primary researcher!
! Information on diet, activity, sleep sunlight exposure, standard medical information!
! Force estimated on a 3 point scale (1 mild, 2 moderate, 3 severe ) from description of events!
!
Handling: ! Data extracted from report forms - entered into MS Access database by researcher!
!
Analysis: ! Univariate analysis compared groups on demographics, genetic and environmental risk factors!
! Continuous variables compared using the student T-test !
! Categorical variables assessed using Fisher's exact test!
! The Kruskal-Wallis test was used for ordinal data. !
! Multivariate logistic regression used to evaluate multiple variables and effect on probability of fracture!
! Odds Risk of fracturing was calculated!
!
Not Returned
19
Incomplete
15
Mother
Fractured
30/79 (38 %)
Father
Fractured
43/79 (54%)
47 % Parents Fractured
74/158
Fractures
79
Mother
Fractured
16/71(23%)
Father
Fractured
28/71 (39%)
31% Parents Fractured
44/142
Controls
71
Complete Report Forms
150
184
Report Forms
Distributed
(90 % Return)
If Mother
Fractured
If Father
Fractured
If Both Parents
Fractured
If Either Parent
Fractured
If Neither Parent
Fractured Odds Ratios 2.1 1.8 3.0 2.1 0.5
95 % CI 1.03 - 4.32 0.96 - 3.5 1.1 - 8.02 0.99 - 4.8 0.24 – 0.93
P Value 0.036 0.46 0.020 0.05 0.0 4
Cases Controls
Mothers Fractured 38% 23%
Fathers Fractured 54% 39%
Both Parents Fractured 22% 9%
Either Parent Fractured 71% 54%
Neither Parent Fractured 29% 46%
Cases Controls Age (years) 9.1 8.5
Activity (hrs/day) 10.1 10.3
Sleep (hrs /day) 9.1 8.5
Sunlight (hrs/week) 24.2 23.7 Calcium (mg/day) 1550 1559 Cola (drink/day) 0.4 0.3
Force estimate (0 -3) 2 2
Male 63% 52%
Odds Ratios for Fracture Based on Parental History of Fracture
Baseline Characteristics and Risk Factor Comparisons
Percentage of Parents Fractured for Cases vs. Controls
Overview of Enrollment and Results
Positives: Fairly easy on text with bulleted methods section. Title is big and tells the main point of the research. Has a flow
diagram. Has logos and authors.
Negatives: The ‘reader gravity’ could be improved by using same sized background boxes- top to bottom and left to right
reading. Number the order of sections. The last 3 sections are hard to see clearly- better placed in similar background box. Cut
out some of the introducion text further. Change to a more sensible font. Graphics for results would have been easier for the
reader.
Positives: Fairly easy on text with bulleted methods section. Title is big and tells the main point of the research. Has a flow diagram. Has logos and authors. Nice colors.Negatives: The ‘reader gravity’ could be improved by using same sized background boxes- top to bottom and left to right reading. Number the order of sections for correct flow. The last 3 sections are hard to see clearly- better placed in similar background box. Cut out some of the introducion text further. Change to a more sensible font.
Positives: Title is big and tells the main point of the research. Section titles are clear. Pictures create interest. Logos present. Nice colours.Negatives: A bit jarring visually! The ‘reader gravity’ needs improvement- same sized background boxes- top to bottom and left to right reading. Number the order of sections as it is difficult to know which way to read for this story. Cut out lots of text! Use bulleted points more.
Giving an Effective Poster Presentation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMSaFUrk-FA
Useful websites:
https://www.ncsu.edu/project/posters/
http://colinpurrington.com/tips/academic/posterdesign
http://guides.nyu.edu/posters
Acknowledgements and templates
http://www.wchri.org/acknowledgments-and-logos
http://www.wchri.org/poster-and-oral-presentation-guidelines
The Oral Research Presentation
To Refresh your memory
You worked really hard for these results! What main results do you want to emphasize
What’s the one or two points you want them to remember
Why should they care? How is it relevant to your audience - Story?
Tell your “research story” in a manner that works for you
Tell them what you’re going to tell them….
Tell them ….. Tell them what you told them
Earn their enthusiasm and trust
Good research can be presented badly - or well Genuine Contained Enthusiasm is contagious – spark their
enthusiasm
Critical/ thoughtful appraisal of your work and related work will earn trust of audience Know your stuff (literature) and your slides/poster
Getting Started…
Before you start THINK about
Your Audience
Your timing and number of slides
How you communicate your findings
What are the main areas you will go through
What questions you will anticipate
How can they get a hold of me later?
Anticipate what could go wrong?
Do your background checks
How Long Do you Have?
Instructions for Presentation (declaration/subsections)
Who is your audience? Specialized / General
Moderators
Judged
PubMED your moderators/ judges
people ask questions on things they know
Dress to respect your audience
Facilities and A/V Connections
Your Slides
Use powerpoint/ prezie/keynote .. Be familiar You control the slide.... Not visa versa
Make a PDF Version as a back up
NO sound effects
NO crazy fade in/ blinky blinky
“Transparency” can be helpful to emphasize the slide and not too distracting
Your Slides
Use headings and transitions
Minimize Amount of Text but need main points
People need to read and LISTEN to you
Pictures are worth more than words Don’t use graphics/ scanned results no one can read
Ie “I know this is hard to see but....”
This is scary…..
PKA
Ca Channel
Ca2+
Adenylyl Cyclaseα -AR β -ARGsGs
Catecholamines
ATP cAMP AMP
PDE
PDE Milrinone
AMP
cAMP PKA
SR
PLAMB
X
X
Ca2+
Troponin
complex
Inotropy
Lusitropy
PKA
Maybe not so bad…
PKA
Ca Channel
Ca2+
Adenylyl Cyclaseα -AR β -ARGsGs
Catecholamines
ATP cAMP AMP
PDE
PDE Milrinone
AMP
cAMP PKA
SR
PLAMB
X
X
Ca2+
Troponin
complex
Inotropy
Lusitropy
PKA
Your Slides
White/ Black background is jarring for eyes Use High Contrast writing and slides
Use 20-24 point (at least)
Use Serif Fonts – “feet” create eyesight line
Minimize ALL CAPS – use for rare emphasis
No Mach 3 Slides - comfort /conversation pace
Talking the Talk (Poster or Oral)
Voice and tone - MAKE IT CLEAR Talk WITH/TO your audience not AT your audience
Not too fast SLOW DOWN – conversation speed
Avoid monotone - controlled genuine enthusiasm
Avoid Um, Uh, OK.... Silent pause is better
A Tasteful Joke or two is OK
Eye contact
Look up > slides or paper
Pick a few interested/ known people to “talk with”
Talking the Talk (Poster or Oral)
Start on time, finish on time
Practice Practice Practice ...then relax Use clear, accurate descriptions
Get honest feedback
Mirror – Practice with a stopwatch
If nervous or English is not your first language Write out your presentation and read SLOWLY - memorize
Have notes on Powerpoint/ etc (presenter view)
Practice with English speaker
Let your graphs/pictures do the work
Gestures and Pointer
Gestures Oak without roots NOT a tumbleweed
Straight up but move occasionally
Hands out of pockets, change out of pockets
If have a pocket mic – avoid dress without pocket – pager rule
The pointer Pointer to highlight ..not a light saber
Bring water
Bring a watch/phone clock
Presentation Organization
Now you are psyched up/ informed/organized
Need to organize your research into a logical presentation Confirm Meeting Expectations
Organized talk implies organized, respectable research
The Oral Presentation
Title Slide
Declaration/ Conflict of Interest (if needed)
Background
Relevance / Clinical / NICU application
Research Question (Hypothesis)
Study Design
Results
Conclusions/ Summary
Limitations/ Future Presentation
Acknowledgments/ Funding
Back up Slides
If you have 9-10 minutes
Does that include question period?
Title/Introduction/Question should be 2-3 minutes
Methods and Results – 5-6 minutes
Conclusion/Further Directions 1-2 minutes
Number of Slides How clearly you speak
How quickly you speak
Content of slides
Title Slide
Large, “Easy to Read” Title - Informative
Names of all Authors Affiliations, Positions, Institutions
Event and Date
+/- Granting Agencies (begin or end)
First Impression - Something a little “exciting” Tailor for the audience
Thank the Chair/audience for opportunity to present
Introduce yourself, institution and your Title
Comparing the Hemodynamic Effects
of Milrinone, Epinephrine and
Dobutamine in a Swine Model of
Neonatal Asphyxia-Reoxygenation
Joynt CA*, Bigam D#, Cheung PY*.Departments of Pediatrics* and Surgery#,
University of Alberta
Canadian Paediatric Society 84th Annual Conference
June 28, 2007
Jaime BlackwoodPGY 5 PICU Fellow
Dr Jon DuffDr Terry KlassenDr Chloe Joynt
Declaration Slide
Check to see if required by the audience/ conference
Any “competing interests” Ties to industry
Also note that you may need permission to reproduce other’s graphs and to display photos
Background – ZOOMING IN
Start: General Description of the Important Principle
Focus in on your area of research for that principle why your research bears importance in grand scheme of things
Let’s audience know the scientific borders of your research
Summarize BRIEFLY work done in area Illustrates work is relevant
Demonstrates a hole in the literature that you are trying to fill
Give credit where it is due – know the studies you quote
Relevance or Application
Transition to Hypothesis or Research Question
Tell a FOCUSED story (no more than 20-30 sec) Useful if it has basis in truth
Tie it to clinical or interesting applicability
Demonstrate one important message – Your Question Lack of research or resource you are going to provide
Bench to bedside
Clinical Query
Hanging out before rounds
Research Question and Hypothesis
State it simply
One Slide for Question
One slide for Hypothesis (if needed)
Don’t try to validate your hypothesis in gory detail at this point ..that is what the rest of your presentation is for
Clinical Question
In an asphyxiated newborn, can MILRINONE treat:
- the stunned heart
- increased vascular resistance
- pulmonary hypertension
Will it be better/worse than epinephrine
or dobutamine?
Primary Research Question/
(can change easily to Hypothesis)
In a swine model of neonatal asphyxia-reoxygenationhow will :
Epinephrine, dobutamine, and milrinoneAffect cardiac output
Compare with vasopressor effects
Affect PHTN aggravation
Due to vasodilatory properties, will milrinone-Decrease vascular resistance
Increase regional flow and oxygen delivery
Study Design
Detail is dependant on audience
Keep it simple but informative In your head but not necessarily on a slide
Know how all the tests/procedures / process were done
Know limitations of study design/methodology
Simple, animated pictures with some text is easiest Talk around them
Highlight (not light saber) important points of picture
Dont gross out your audience with pics or “descriptive” words
Don’t belabour this... “RESULTS” is what people want
Study Design – MED Trial
Anesthesia and Instrumentation and Stabilize
Hypoxia – FiO2 0.08-0.15 (2h)
Reoxygenation – 100% (1h), 21% (3h)
SHAM CONTROL EPINEPHRINE DOBUTAMINE MILRINONE
Normal
Saline
infusion
Epinephrine
0.5
mcg/kg/min
Dobutamine
20
mcg/kg/min
Milrinone
0.75
mcg/kg/min
2h
6 6 6 6
Results
Work through your results on piece at a time Summarize results of “section/question” before next results
Don’t show “not relevant” results
Leading them to your final conclusion
You know the lingo and cerebral shortcut of your research area and work ..... The audience does not No shop talk
Clear explanation of what you are showing them
Discuss YOUR results...don’t speculate or deviate
Pictures and Graphs
Worth multiple pages of text
Make it large, easy to see colors, SIMPLE
Consistency – use same colors for same groups as you go through graphs/charts If using same figure multiple times – multiple slides/highlight
Don’t flip back and forth in presentation
Remove information from figure not relevant to presentation
Graphs- Pictures- Charts
Orientate the audience – explain what’s measured, groups, axis
Well LARGE labelled axis or categories
Summarize the main point of the graph – simple steps not exquisite detail - verbal or written
They can SEE the detail... They HEAR the main point
P< 0.05 M,E, D increased cardiac index vs control – ANOVA
Cardiac Index
Time (min)
0 100 200 300
ml/k
g/m
in
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240Control
Epinephrine
Dobutamine
Milrinone
100% 02 21% 02
*
Hypoxia
end of
hypoxia
Treatment
Milrinone decreases SVRI compared to control * p <0.09
Systemic Vascular Resistance
Control Milrinone Dobutamine Epinephrine
mm
Hg/m
L/k
g/m
in
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
*
Stats
Understand the stats that you used In case of questions
Interpret the data correctly
Highlight significant finds
Define significance
Talk or show to statistician/ supervisor before presenting
Summary and Conclusion
Brief, concrete and to the point
Simply state a concise major conclusion Decisive
Keep less than three major points
Should be derived from the data SHOWN
Should directly address your previously stated research question
CHECK back against your RESEARCH QUESTION SLIDE
Zoom out Remind audience of how your research relates to a greater area
Limitations
Demonstrate you know the scope of applicability
Demonstrates situations were your work is valid (or may not be)
Demonstrates insight and honesty
Earns respect of audience
Decreases number of questions
If “Limitations” not part of the suggested format –“back up slides”
Future Directions
Where and why this can this be looked at further
Demonstrate you can think of the next step
May interest others to join you or contribute suggestions to better your research
Decreases number of questions
If not part of the suggested format – “back up slides”
Acknowledgements
List of names and granting agencies = BORING
so use….
Pictures – you can generalize Lab staff or colleagues
Granting agencies that made this work possible
Thank your supervisor(s)
Thank your Granting agencies
Money
In kind support (access to stats, how to use data management)
JUDICORINNE
DR. CHEUNG
DR. BIGAM
Zak, Mohammed, Grace
Thank you
Dennis and Elle
Thanks/Invite Questions
Opportunity for one last impact picture
Thank the audience for their time/attention
Invite Questions Don’t step on moderator toes if there is one
Questions
Why we do all this stuff….
Answering Questions
+/- moderator
Repeat or summarize the question Audience can hear, clarify question for yourself, time to think
Break up the “2 part” question
Answer the question concisely, politely with grace
Acknowledge a good question or thought Admit graciously if you don’t know – “interesting concept”
Politely interrupt the “expert”/ don’t pick a fight “May I clarify..Are you asking.” “ would love to discuss at break”
“Back Up Slides- Example Topics”
Anticipate Questions you will receive Know your audience
Mechanism of drugs
Unshown related methods or data
Quoted studies - summary
Applicability to medicine
Relevance of technique or model used
Limitations/future directions
In summary
Do your homework/ read instructions/ be prepared
Practice and speak slowly
Plan it out ahead What is your main point
How will you get the audience to your point
Keep things simple and relevant
Be enthusiastic, polite and knowledgeable
Questions
Thank you!!
MOCK ORAL
Curtis SJ, Craig W, Logue E, Vandermeer B, Hanson A, Klassen T.
Division of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, Departments of Pediatrics and Emergency Medicine, Women and Children’s Health Research Institute, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta.
Background Peripheral Intravenous catheters are the most
common medical procedures in children.
PIVC’s are painful
PIVCs are feared by most children
PIVCs are stressful for children ,families and
practitioners
PIVCs have a first attempt success rate of 50-70%
in children.
Can new technology
improve success rates?
Near-infrared
Ultrasound
Experimental Arm 1
Ultrasound
Experimental Arm 2
Near-Infrared
Standard Care Arm
Overview
Standard
"Blind" technique
Number of attempts
Time to placement
Nursing satisfaction
Economic Analysis
First attempt Yes/No
Ultrasound VeinViewer
RandomizationAge < 3 yrs OR
Age > 3 yrs
Recruitment
Training
ResultsGroup N First
Attempt
Success
Mean
number
attempts
Procedure
Time
(From
verbal)
Procedure time
(from
tourniquet)
Standard 146 75% 1.43 8.6 1.5
Ultrasound 137 71% 1.40 14.4 2.3
Veinviewer 135 66% 1.58 8.7 1.9
P- value 416 0.28 0.21 0.78 0.001
Conclusions
Unfortunately neither Ultrasound nor
Veinviewer improves the technique
of PIV in the pediatric emergency
department.
Next Steps Detailed Analysis- DIVA, subgroups
Nursing and parent survey
Place in context of other research
Share results
Other research questions?
Many Thanks to: PED nurses and families
Research coordinators- Erin Logue & Joyce Chikuma
Research Assistants: Chris Bon, Sheila Evans, LysianneKnox, Amy Armstrong, Ginger McGillivray, Hansen Zhou, Leta Philip , Yvonne Klatt & Ramoona Ali, Nadia Dow,AnitaSaini, Fiona MacKenzie.
Gerri St. Jean
PED physicians and administration
Clinical Research Informatics & Rick Watts
AcknowledgementsWording and logos available here:
http://www.wchri.org/acknowledgments-and-logos
THE END
Extra slide for Questions
Critiques?
What could be improved?
Judges Form
Curtis SJ, Craig W, Logue E, Vandermeer B, Hanson A, Klassen T.
Division of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, Departments of Pediatrics and Emergency Medicine, Women and Children’s Health Research Institute, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta.
Curtis SJ, Craig W, Logue E, Vandermeer B, Hanson A, Klassen T.
Division of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, Departments of Pediatrics and Emergency Medicine, Women and Children’s Health Research Institute, University of Alberta, Edmonton,
Alberta.
Curtis SJ, Craig W, Logue E, Vandermeer B, Hanson A, Klassen T.
Division of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, Departments of Pediatrics and Emergency Medicine, Women and Children’s Health Research Institute, University of Alberta, Edmonton,
Alberta.
INSERT COI/Disclosure
Explain how bias has been
mitigated (if necessary)
Background Peripheral Intravenous catheters are the most
common medical procedures in children.
PIVC’s are painful
PIVCs are feared by most children
PIVCs are stressful for children ,families and
practitioners
PIVCs have a first attempt success rate of 50-70%
in children.
IV’s are:
• Common
• Painful
• Feared
• Stressful
• Time consuming
First attempt success
rate only :
50-76%
Background
ResultsGroup N First
Attempt
Success
Mean
number
attempts
Procedur
e
Time
(From
verbal)
Procedure
time
(from
tourniquet)
Standard 14
6
75% 1.43 8.6 1.5
Ultrasound 13
7
71% 1.40 14.4 2.3
Veinviewer 13
5
66% 1.58 8.7 1.9
P- value 41
6
0.28 0.21 0.78 0.001
75%71%
66%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Ultrasound Veinviewer Standard
Proporon%
FirstA emptSuccess
1.41.58
1.43
0.1
1.1
2.1
Ultrasound Veinviewer Standard
Number(n)
MeanNumberofA empts
14.40
8.70 8.60
0.30
2.30
4.30
6.30
8.30
10.30
12.30
14.30
16.30
18.30
Ultrasound Veinviewer Standard
Time(minutes)
Procedure me(set-up)
2.30
1.90
1.50
0.30
0.80
1.30
1.80
2.30
2.80
3.30
3.80
4.30
4.80
Ultrasound Veinviewer Standard
Time(minutes)
ProcedureTime(Tourniquet)
Conclusions
Unfortunately neither Ultrasound nor
Veinviewer improves the technique
of PIV in the pediatric emergency
department.
Conclusions
This randomized controlled trial did not
provide evidence that either
Ultrasound or VeinViewer improves
the rate of success of IV placement for
children in the pediatric emergency
department.
Other Critiques? Missing Hypothesis
Missing Ethics and Operational approvals
Missing baseline demographics
Place results in context of other research
Didn’t discuss stratification
