EVC 2018 Statistics EVC Participants: Geographical breakdown 6,9% 1,4% 0,3% 0,1% 10,5% Europe 1459 Middle East 189 Asia/Pacific 124 USA 26 Africa 6 Oceania 2 80,8% EVC 2018 : 55 Countries (Total participants :1806) Armenia Australia Austria Bahrain Belarus Belgium Bulgaria Canada China Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Egypt Estonia Finland France Georgia Germany Greece Hungary India Iran Ireland Israel Italy Japan Latvia Lebanon Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Mexico Namibia Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Romania Russian Federation Saudi Arabia Serbia Slovakia Slovenia South Africa Spain Sweden Switzerland Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Ukraine United Kingdom United States of America
EVC Participants by Category (Percentages) 5,3% 4,4% 6,1% 18,1% Physicians Medical Industry Nurse Students Allied Health Professional 66,1% EVC Participants by Category (Absolute numbers) 96 79 111 326 Physicians Medical Industry Nurse Students Allied Health Professional 1194 EVC 2018 : 52 Medical companies 3D Systems Simbionix Angiocare Angiodynamics Bard Bauerfeind Bayer Bentley InnoMed Biolas Biolitec biomedical technology Biotronik Boston Scientific Brightfish CAVA Cook Medical Endologix ESVS Getinge Johnson & Johnson JOTEC JuZo Kreussler Gemeente Maastricht Lamepro Laminate Medical Technologies LeMaitre Lohmann & Rauscher Charing Cross Medi Medistim Medtronic Merit Medical MUMC Moeller Medical Olympus Optimed Penumbra Philips PS Medtech RD Global Scanlan International, Inc. Siemens Healthcare Smith & Nephew Therenva Tobrix Vascutek W. L. Gore & Associates Wisepress
30% 28,4% Attended number of workshops (%) per EVC participant 25% 20% 20,9% 22,9% 15% 15,5% 12,3% 10% 5% 0% 1 2 3 4 5+ Attended number of workshops (%) per EVC participant Age participants EVC 2018 0% 3% 2% 4% 15% 20% 30% < 21 21 30 31 40 41 50 51 60 61 70 71 80 Unknown 26%
EVC 2018 Questionnaire Results: 5 The EVC educational activities increased my knowledge and skills in vascular surgery/medicine 4 The arterial master classes and workshops were important for training 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 4 The venous master classes and workshops were important for training 4 The vascular access master classes and workshops were important for training 3 3 3 3 4 The case discussions have significant educational value 5 4 The quality of the plenary lecture was? 4 4 3 3 3 3
5 4 The quality of the speakers was? 3 Rate the added value of 3D videos compared to traditional 2D videos 4 3 3 3 6 The EVC meeting was well organized? 6 The location (venue) of EVC was appropriate for the congress 5 5 4 4 3 3 4 3 The quality of the catering was 6 I recommend EVC as an important training and education meeting 3 5 4 3 Was the app user friendly? 5 4 4 3 3
% Good / Excellent ( score 4/5 or 5/5 ) Was the app user friendly? I recommend EVC as an important training and education meeting 77,60% 82,37% The quality of the catering was 58,19% The location (venue) of EVC was appropriate for the congress The EVC meeting was well organized? 80,79% 85,32% Rate the added value of 3D videos compared to traditional 2D videos 65,20% The quality of the speakers was? The quality of the plenary lecture was? The case discussions have significant educational value The vascular access master classes and workshops were important for training The venous master classes and workshops were important for training The arterial master classes and workshops were important for training The EVC educational activities increased my knowledge and skills in vascular 78,94% 74,79% 73,96% 69,38% 70,22% 76,13% 80,54% 18% My professional activity is: 2% 8% 17% My main field of interest during EVC was: 20% Medical industry Medical student Physician Specialized nurse/technician 17% All three programs Arterial program Vascular Access program Venous program 72% 46%