Search

Introduction The International Federation for Emergency Medicine (IFEM) Ultrasound Special Interest Group (USIG) was tasked with development of a hierarchical consensus approach to the use of point of care ultrasound (PoCUS) in patients with hypotension and cardiac arrest., Methods: The IFEM USIG invited 24 recognized international leaders in PoCUS from emergency medicine and critical care to form an expert panel to develop the sonography in hypotension and cardiac arrest (SHoC) protocol. The panel was provided with reported disease incidence, along with a list of recommended PoCUS views from previously published protocols and guidelines. Using a modified Delphi methodology the panel was tasked with integrating the disease incidence, their clinical experience and their knowledge of the medical literature to evaluate what role each view should play in the proposed SHoC protocol., Results: Consensus on the SHoC protocols for hypotension and cardiac arrest was reached after three rounds of the modified Delphi process. The final SHoC protocol and operator checklist received over 80% consensus approval. The IFEM-approved final protocol, recommend Core, Supplementary, and Additional PoCUS views. SHoC-hypotension core views consist of cardiac, lung, and inferior vena vaca (IVC) views, with supplementary cardiac views, and additional views when clinically indicated. Subxiphoid or parasternal cardiac views, minimizing pauses in chest compressions, are recommended as core views for SHoC-cardiac arrest; supplementary views are lung and IVC, with additional views when clinically indicated. Both protocols recommend use of the "4 F" approach: fluid, form, function, filling., Conclusion: An international consensus on sonography in hypotension and cardiac arrest is presented. Future prospective validation is required.

To meet a critical and growing need for a standardized approach to emergency point of care ultrasound (PoCUS) worldwide, emergency physicians must be trained to deliver and teach this skill in an accepted and reliable format. Currently, there is no globally recognized, standard PoCUS curriculum that defines the accepted applications, as well as standards for training and practice of PoCUS by specialists and trainees in emergency medicine. To address this deficit, the International Federation for Emergency Medicine (IFEM) convened a sub-committee of international experts in PoCUS to outline a curriculum for training of specialists in emergency PoCUS. This curriculum document represents the consensus of recommendations by this sub-committee. The curriculum is designed to provide a framework for PoCUS education in emergency medicine. The focus is on the processes required to select core and enhanced applications, as well as the key elements required for the delivery of PoCUS training from introduction through to continuing professional development and skill maintenance. It is designed not to be prescriptive but to assist educators and emergency medicine leadership to advance PoCUS education in emergency medicine no matter the training venue. The content of this curriculum is relevant not just for communities with mature emergency medicine systems but in particular for developing nations or for nations seeking to develop PoCUS training programs within the current educational structure. We anticipate that there will be wide variability in how this curriculum is implemented and taught, reflecting the existing educational environment, resources and goals of educational programs.

The purpose of developing a core content for subspecialty training in clinical ultrasonography (US) is to standardize the education and qualifications required to provide oversight of US training, clinical use, and administration to improve patient care. This core content would be mastered by a fellow as a separate and unique postgraduate training, beyond that obtained during an emergency medicine (EM) residency or during medical school. The core content defines the training parameters, resources, and knowledge of clinical US necessary to direct clinical US divisions within medical specialties. Additionally, it is intended to inform fellowship directors and candidates for certification of the full range of content that might appear in future examinations. This article describes the development of the core content and presents the core content in its entirety., (© 2014 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Bedside emergency ultrasound has been used by emergency physicians for >20 years for a variety of conditions. In adult centers, emergency ultrasound is routinely used in the management of victims of blunt abdominal trauma, in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm and biliary disease, and in women with first-trimester pregnancy complications. Although its use has grown dramatically in the last decade in adult emergency departments, only recently has this tool been embraced by pediatric emergency physicians. As the modality advances and becomes more available, it will be important for primary care pediatricians to understand its uses and limitations and to ensure that pediatric emergency physicians have access to the proper training, equipment, and experience. This article is meant to review the current literature relating to emergency ultrasound in pediatric emergency medicine, as well as to describe potential pediatric applications.

Background: Optimal training required for proficiency in bedside ultrasound is unknown. In addition, the value of proctored training is often assumed but has never been quantified., Methods: To compare different training regimens for both attending physicians and first year residents (interns), a prospective study was undertaken to assess knowledge retention six months after an introductory ultrasound course. Eighteen emergency physicians and twelve emergency medicine interns were assessed before and 6 months after an introductory ultrasound course using a standardized, image-based ultrasound test. In addition, the twelve emergency medicine interns were randomized to a group which received additional proctored ultrasound hands-on instruction from qualified faculty or to a control group with no hands-on instruction to determine if proctored exam training impacts ultrasound knowledge. Paired and unpaired estimates of the median shift in test scores between groups were made with the Hodges-Lehmann extension of the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test., Results: Six months after the introductory course, test scores (out of a 24 point test) were a median of 2.0 (95% CI 1.0 to 3.0) points higher for residents in the control group, 5.0 (95% CI 3.0 to 6.0) points higher for residents in the proctored group, and 2.5 (95% CI 1.0 to 4.0) points higher for the faculty group. Residents randomized to undergo proctored ultrasound examinations exhibited a higher score improvement than their cohorts who were not with a median difference of 3.0 (95% CI 1.0 to 5.0) points., Conclusion: We conclude that significant improvement in knowledge persists six months after a standard introductory ultrasound course, and incorporating proctored ultrasound training into an emergency ultrasound curriculum may yield even higher knowledge retention.

Emergency physicians have used point-of-care ultrasonography since the 1990 s. Pediatric emergency medicine physicians have more recently adopted this technology. Point-of-care ultrasonography is used for various scenarios, particularly the evaluation of soft tissue infections or blunt abdominal trauma and procedural guidance. To date, there are no published statements from national organizations specifically for pediatric emergency physicians describing the incorporation of point-of-care ultrasonography into their practice. This document outlines how pediatric emergency departments may establish a formal point-of-care ultrasonography program. This task includes appointing leaders with expertise in point-of-care ultrasonography, effectively training and credentialing physicians in the department, and providing ongoing quality assurance reviews.

The utility of point-of-care ultrasound is well supported by the medical literature. Consequently, pediatric emergency medicine providers have embraced this technology in everyday practice. Recently, the American Academy of Pediatrics published a policy statement endorsing the use of point-of-care ultrasound by pediatric emergency medicine providers. To date, there is no standard guideline for the practice of point-of-care ultrasound for this specialty. This document serves as an initial step in the detailed 'how to' and description of individual point-of-care ultrasound examinations. Pediatric emergency medicine providers should refer to this paper as reference for published research, objectives for learners, and standardized reporting guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The ability to objectively predict which emergency department patients are likely to have a ureteral stone may aid in cost-effectiveness and patient-centered diagnostic imaging decisions. We performed an external validation of the STONE score, a clinical prediction rule for the presence of uncomplicated ureteral stones in emergency department patients developed at Yale University School of Medicine. Methods: Five hundred thirty-six (536) consecutive patients evaluated in an urban tertiary care emergency department for the possible diagnosis of ureteral stone were retrospectively reviewed. The STONE score uses five factors (gender, duration of pain, race, nausea/vomiting, erythrocytes on urine dipstick) to categorize patients into low, medium, and high probability of having a ureteral stone. The total STONE score risk is 0-13 and divided into three groups: low risk = 0-5, moderate risk = 6-9, and high risk = 10-13. Results: Of the 536 patients evaluated for suspected ureteral stone, 257 (47.8 %) had a ureteral stone. Mean patient age was 45.9 years (SD 16.3), and gender distribution was 43.9 % female and 56.1 % male. Distribution of STONE score risk was 24.1 % low, 48.1 % moderate, and 27.7 % high. Diagnosis of ureteral stone by STONE score risk was 14 % for low-risk group, 48.3 % for moderate-risk group, and 75.8 % for high-risk group. This distribution is consistent with internal validation at Yale University School of Medicine, where values were 8.3-9.2 % for low risk, 51.3-51.6 % for moderate risk, and 88.6-89.6 % for high risk. Conclusions: Our study validates the use of the STONE clinical score to categorize patients as low, moderate, and high risk for ureteral stone. This could help guide development of clinical decision rules for diagnostic studies and imaging in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The purpose of this study is to provide evidence-based and expert consensus recommendations for lung ultrasound with focus on emergency and critical care settings. Methods: A multidisciplinary panel of 28 experts from eight countries was involved. Literature was reviewed from January 1966 to June 2011. Consensus members searched multiple databases including Pubmed, Medline, OVID, Embase, and others. The process used to develop these evidence-based recommendations involved two phases: determining the level of quality of evidence and developing the recommendation. The quality of evidence is assessed by the grading of recommendation, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) method. However, the GRADE system does not enforce a specific method on how the panel should reach decisions during the consensus process. Our methodology committee decided to utilize the RAND appropriateness method for panel judgment and decisions/consensus. Results: Seventy-three proposed statements were examined and discussed in three conferences held in Bologna, Pisa, and Rome. Each conference included two rounds of face-to-face modified Delphi technique. Anonymous panel voting followed each round. The panel did not reach an agreement and therefore did not adopt any recommendations for six statements. Weak/conditional recommendations were made for 2 statements, and strong recommendations were made for the remaining 65 statements. The statements were then recategorized and grouped to their current format. Internal and external peer-review processes took place before submission of the recommendations. Updates will occur at least every 4 years or whenever significant major changes in evidence appear. Conclusions: This document reflects the overall results of the first consensus conference on 'point-of-care' lung ultrasound. Statements were discussed and elaborated by experts who published the vast majority of papers on clinical use of lung ultrasound in the last 20 years. Recommendations were produced to guide implementation, development, and standardization of lung ultrasound in all relevant settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: There is limited information on the financial implications of an emergency department ultrasound (ED US) program. The authors sought to perform a fiscal analysis of an integrated ED US program. Methods: A retrospective review of billing data was performed for fiscal year (FY) 2007 for an urban academic ED with an ED US program. The ED had an annual census of 80,000 visits and 1,101 ED trauma activations. The ED is a core teaching site for a 4-year emergency medicine (EM) residency, has 35 faculty members, and has 24-hour availability of all radiology services including formal US. ED US is utilized as part of evaluation of all trauma activations and for ED procedures. As actual billing charges and reimbursement rates are institution-specific and proprietary information, relative value units (RVUs) and reimbursement based on the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) 2007 fee schedule (adjusted for fixed diagnosis-related group [DRG] payments and bad debt) was used to determine revenue generated from ED US. To estimate potential volume, assumptions were made on improvement in documentation rate for diagnostic scans (current documentation rates based on billed volume versus diagnostic studies in diagnostic image database), with no improvements assumed for procedural ED US. Expenses consist of three components—capital costs, training costs, and ongoing operational costs—and were determined by institutional experience. Training costs were considered sunken expenses by this institution and were thus not included in the original return on investment (ROI) calculation, although for this article a second ROI calculation was done with training cost estimates included. For the purposes of analysis, certain key assumptions were made. We utilized a collection rate of 45% and hospitalization rates (used to adjust for fixed DRG payments) of 33% for all diagnostic scans, 100% for vascular access, and 10% for needle placement. An optimal documentation rate of 95% was used to estimate potential revenue. Results: In FY 2007, 486 limited echo exams of abdomen (current procedural terminology [CPT] 76705) and 480 limited echo cardiac exams were performed (CPT 93308) while there were 78 exams for US-guided vascular access (CPT 76937) and 36 US-guided needle placements when performing paracentesis, thoracentesis, or location of abscess for drainage (CPT 76492). Applying the 2007 CMS fee schedule and above assumptions, the revenue generated was 578 RVUs and $35,541 ($12,934 in professional physician fees and $22,607 in facility fees). Assuming optimal documentation rates for diagnostic ED US scans, ED US could have generated 1,487 RVUs and $94,593 ($33,953 in professional physician fees and $60,640 in facility fees). Program expenses include an initial capital expense (estimated at $120,000 for two US machines) and ongoing operational costs ($68,640 per year to cover image quality assurance review, continuing education, and program maintenance). Based on current revenue, there would be an annual operating loss, and thus an ROI cannot be calculated. However, if potential revenue is achieved, the annual operating income will be $22,846 per year with an ROI of 4.9 years to break even with initial investment. Conclusions: Determining an ROI is a required procedure for any business plan for establishing an ED US program. Our analysis demonstrates that an ED US program that captures charges for trauma and procedural US and achieves the potential billing volume breaks even in less than 5 years, at which point it would generate a positive margin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Measurements of the optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD) using bedside ultrasound (US) have been shown to correlate with clinical and radiologic signs and symptoms of increased intracranial pressure (ICP). Objectives: Previous literature has identified 5 mm as the ONSD measurement above which patients exhibit either clinical or radiologic signs of elevated ICP. The goals of this study were to evaluate the association between ONSD and ICP and to validate the commonly used ONSD threshold of 5 mm using direct measurements of ICP as measured by ventriculostomy. Methods: A prospective blinded observational study was performed using a convenience sample of adult patients in both the emergency department (ED) and the neurologic intensive care unit (ICU) who had invasive intracranial monitors placed as part of their clinical care. Ocular USs were performed with a 10–5 MHz linear probe. Emergency physicians (EPs) with previous ocular US experience performed ONSD measurements while blinded to the contemporaneous ICP reading obtained directly from invasive monitoring. The association between ONSD and ICP was assessed with the Spearman rank correlation coefficient, and a receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve was created to determine the optimal ONSD cutoff to detect ICP > 20 cm H2O. Results: Thirty-eight ocular USs were performed on 15 individual patients. Spearman rank correlation coefficient of ONSD and ICP was 0.59 (p < 0.0005) demonstrating a significant positive correlation. An ROC curve was created to assess the ability of ONSD to distinguish an abnormal ICP greater than 20 cm H2O. The area under the ROC curve was 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.84 to 0.99). Based on inspection of the ROC curve, ONSD > 5 mm performed well to detect ICP > 20 cm H2O with a sensitivity of 88% (95% CI = 47% to 99%) and specificity of 93% (95% CI = 78% to 99%). Conclusions: Using an ROC curve the authors systematically confirmed the commonly used threshold of ONSD > 5 mm to detect ICP > 20 cm H2O. This study directly correlates ventriculostomy measurements of ICP with US ONSD measurements and provides further support for the use of ONSD measurements as a noninvasive test for elevated ICP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is an important clinical tool for a growing number of medical specialties. The current American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) Ultrasound Guidelines recommend that trainees perform 150–300 ultrasound scans as part of POCUS training. We sought to assess the relationship between ultrasound scan numbers and performance on an ultrasound-focused observed structured clinical examination (OSCE). Methods: This was a cross-sectional cohort study in which the number of ultrasound scans residents had previously performed were obtained from a prospective database and compared with their total score on an ultrasound OSCE. Ultrasound fellowship trained emergency physicians administered a previously published OSCE that consisted of standardized questions testing image acquisition and interpretation, ultrasound machine mechanics, patient positioning, and troubleshooting. Residents were observed while performing core applications including aorta, biliary, cardiac, deep vein thrombosis, Focused Assessment with Sonography in Trauma (FAST), pelvic, and thoracic ultrasound imaging. Results: Twenty-nine postgraduate year (PGY)-3 and PGY-4 emergency medicine (EM) residents participated in the OSCE. The median OSCE score was 354 [interquartile range (IQR) 343–361] out of a total possible score of 370. Trainees had previously performed a median of 341 [IQR 289–409] total scans. Residents with more than 300 ultrasound scans had a median OSCE score of 355 [IQR 351–360], which was slightly higher than the median OSCE score of 342 [IQR 326–361] in the group with less than 300 total scans (p = 0.04). Overall, a LOWESS curve demonstrated a positive association between scan numbers and OSCE scores with graphical review of the data suggesting a plateau effect. Conclusion: The results of this small single residency program study suggest a pattern of improvement in OSCE performance as scan numbers increased, with the appearance of a plateau effect around 300 scans. Further investigation of this correlation in diverse practice environments and within individual ultrasound modalities will be necessary to create generalizable recommendations for scan requirements as part of overall POCUS proficiency assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To describe the development and initial results of an examination and certification process assessing competence in critical care echocardiography.Design: A test writing committee of content experts from eight professional societies invested in critical care echocardiography was convened, with the Executive Director representing the National Board of Echocardiography. Using an examination content outline, the writing committee was assigned topics relevant to their areas of expertise. The examination items underwent extensive review, editing, and discussion in several face-to-face meetings supervised by National Board of Medical Examiners editors and psychometricians. A separate certification committee was tasked with establishing criteria required to achieve National Board of Echocardiography certification in critical care echocardiography through detailed review of required supporting material submitted by candidates seeking to fulfill these criteria.Setting: The writing committee met twice a year in person at the National Board of Medical Examiner office in Philadelphia, PA.Subjects: Physicians enrolled in the examination of Special Competence in Critical Care Electrocardiography (CCEeXAM).Measurements and Main Results: A total of 524 physicians sat for the examination, and 426 (81.3%) achieved a passing score. Of the examinees, 41% were anesthesiology trained, 33.2% had pulmonary/critical care background, and the majority had graduated training within the 10 years (91.6%). Most candidates work full-time at an academic hospital (46.9%).Conclusions: The CCEeXAM is designed to assess a knowledge base that is shared with echocardiologists in addition to that which is unique to critical care. The National Board of Echocardiography certification establishes that the physician has achieved the ability to independently perform and interpret critical care echocardiography at a standard recognized by critical care professional societies encompassing a wide spectrum of backgrounds. The interest shown and the success achieved on the CCEeXAM by practitioners of critical care echocardiography support the standards set by the National Board of Echocardiography for testamur status and certification in this imaging specialty area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]