Search

The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy and interrater reliability of (1) point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) image interpretation for identification of intussusception and (2) reliability of secondary signs associated with intussusception among experts compared with novice POCUS reviewers.We conducted a planned secondary analysis of a prospective, convenience sample of children aged 3 months to 6 years who were evaluated with POCUS for intussusception across 17 international pediatric emergency departments between October 2018 and December 2020. A random sample of 100 POCUS examinations was reviewed by novice and expert POCUS reviewers. The primary outcome was identification of the presence or absence of intussusception. Secondary outcomes included intussusception size and the presence of trapped free fluid or echogenic foci. Accuracy was summarized using sensitivity and specificity, which were estimated via generalized mixed effects logistic regression. Interrater reliability was summarized via Light's κ statistics with bootstrapped standard errors (SEs). Accuracy and reliability of expert and novice POCUS reviewers were compared.Eighteen expert and 16 novice POCUS reviewers completed the reviews. The average expert sensitivity was 94.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 88.6-97.5), and the specificity was 94.3% (95% CI, 90.3-96.7), significantly higher than the average novice sensitivity of 84.7% (95% CI, 74.3-91.4) and specificity of 80.4% (95% CI, 72.4, 86.7). κ was significantly greater for expert (0.679, SE 0.039) compared with novice POCUS reviewers (0.424, SE 0.044; difference 0.256, SE 0.033). For our secondary outcome measure of intussusception size, κ was significantly greater for experts (0.661, SE 0.038) compared with novices (0.397, SE 0.041; difference 0.264, SE 0.029). Interrater reliability was weak for expert and minimal for novice reviewers regarding the detection of trapped free fluid and echogenic foci.Expert POCUS reviewers demonstrate high accuracy and moderate interrater reliability when identifying intussusception via image interpretation and perform better than novice reviewers.

Study objective: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) performed by experienced clinician sonologists compared to radiology-performed ultrasound (RADUS) for detection of clinically important intussusception, defined as intussusception requiring radiographic or surgical reduction. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, noninferiority, observational study among a convenience sample of children aged 3 months to 6 years treated in tertiary care emergency departments across North and Central America, Europe, and Australia. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy of POCUS and RADUS with respect to clinically important intussusception. Sample size was determined using a 4-percentage-point noninferiority margin for the absolute difference in accuracy. Secondary outcomes included agreement between POCUS and RADUS for identification of secondary sonographic findings. Results: The analysis included 256 children across 17 sites (35 sonologists). Of the 256 children, 58 (22.7%) had clinically important intussusception. POCUS identified 60 (23.4%) children with clinically important intussusception. The diagnostic accuracy of POCUS was 97.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 94.9% to 99.0%), compared to 99.3% (95% CI 96.8% to 99.9%) for RADUS. The absolute difference between the accuracy of RADUS and that of POCUS was 1.5 percentage points (95% CI −0.6 to 3.6). Sensitivity for POCUS was 96.6% (95% CI 87.2% to 99.1%), and specificity was 98.0% (95% CI 94.7% to 99.2%). Agreement was high between POCUS and RADUS for identification of trapped free fluid (83.3%, n=40/48) and decreased color Doppler signal (95.7%, n=22/23). Conclusion: Our findings suggest that the diagnostic accuracy of POCUS performed by experienced clinician sonologists may be noninferior to that of RADUS for detection of clinically important intussusception. Given the limitations of convenience sampling and spectrum bias, a larger randomized controlled trial is warranted.

The aim of this study was to compare ultrasound (US)-marked versus standard lumbar puncture success in infants.This was a prospective cohort study at an academic pediatric emergency department. Standard lumbar puncture success in a retrospective control was compared with success in a US-marked group. Spinal US was performed with infants in the sitting and lateral decubitus position to identify the interspinous space with the most cerebrospinal fluid. The optimal position was determined, and this space was marked. The proceduralist performed the lumbar puncture at the level of the markings. The primary outcome was a successful lumbar puncture by the first provider, defined as a collection of cerebrospinal fluid with less than 1000 red blood cells/mm3. Secondary outcomes were successful lumbar puncture after attempts by more than 1 provider and collection of any spinal fluid.Between June 2017 and April 2019, we enrolled 284 infants younger than 12 months, 210 in the retrospective standard group and 74 in the prospective US-marked group. Baseline characteristics of both groups were similar. The primary outcome showed no difference between US-marked group and control (38% vs 36%; difference: 1.6% [95% confidence interval (CI), -14.7 to 10.7]). Secondary outcomes showed no significant success differences by more than 1 provider (51% vs 39%; difference: 12.8% [95% CI, -25.7 to 0.3]) or in obtaining any spinal fluid (82% vs 79%; difference: 3.9% [95% CI -13.3 to 7.5]).There were no differences in success between US-marked and standard lumbar punctures in infants by different providers.

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.