The aim of this study was to compare the effects of deliberate vs. self-guided practices (both using validated metrics) on the acquisition of needling skills by novice learners.

Randomized Controlled Study.

Simulation lab, Department of Anesthesia, St.Vincent's Hospital, Dublin.

Eighteen medical students.

Students were assigned to either (i) deliberate practice (n = 10) or (ii) self-guided practice (n = 8) groups. After completion of a ‘learning phase’, subjects attempted to perform a predefined task, which entailed advancing a needle towards a target on a phantom gel under ultrasound guidance. Subsequently, all subjects practiced this task using predefined metrics. Only subjects in the deliberate practice group had an expert anesthesiologist during practice. Immediately after completing ‘practice phase’, all subjects attempted to perform the same task, and, on the following day, made two further attempts in succession. Two trained consultant anesthesiologists assessed a video of each performance independently using the pre-defined metrics.

Number of procedural steps completed and number of errors made.

Compared with novices who self-guided their practice using metrics, those who undertook expert-supervised deliberate practice using metrics completed more steps (performance metrics) immediately after practice (median [range], 14.5 [12–15] vs. 3 [1–10], p < 0.0001) and 24 h later (15 [12–15] vs. 4.5 [1–11], p < 0.0001 and 15 [11–15] vs. 4 [2–14], p < 0.0001). They also made fewer errors immediately after practice (median [range], 0 [0–0] vs. 5 [3–8], p < 0.0001) and 24 h later, (0 [0–3] vs. 6.5 [3–8], p < 0.0001 and 0 [0–3] vs. 4 [2–7], p < 0.0001).

Combining deliberate practice with metrics improved acquisition of needling skills.