Accuracy of Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST) in Blunt Trauma Abdomen-A Prospective Study

Point-of-care abdominal ultrasound in pediatric and neonatal intensive care units

A spectrum of critical abdominal pathological conditions that might occur in neonates and children warrants real-time point-of-care abdominal ultrasound (abdominal POCUS) assessment. Abdominal radiographs have limited value with low sensitivity and specificity in many cases and have no value in assessing abdominal organ perfusion and microcirculation (Rehan et al. in Clin Pediatr (Phila) 38(11):637-643, 1999). The advantages of abdominal POCUS include that it is non-invasive, easily available, can provide information in real-time, and can guide therapeutic intervention (such as paracentesis and urinary bladder catheterization), making it a crucial tool for use in pediatric and neonatal abdominal emergencies (Martínez Biarge et al. in J Perinat Med 32(2):190-194, 2004) and (Alexander et al. in Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 106(1):F96-103, 2021).  Conclusion: Abdominal POCUS is a dynamic assessment with many ultrasound markers of gut injury by two dimensions (2-D) and color Doppler (CD) compared to the abdominal X-ray; the current evidence supports the superiority of abdominal POCUS over an abdominal X-ray in emergency situations. However, it should still be considered an adjunct rather than replacing abdominal X-rays due to its limitations and operator constraints (Alexander et al. in Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 106(1):F96-103, 2021). What is Known: • Ultrasound is an important modality for the assessment of abdominal pathologies. What is New: • The evidence supports the superiority of abdominal POCUS over an abdominal X-ray in emergency abdominal situations in the neonatal and pediatric intensive care units.

Accuracy of FAST in detecting intraabdominal bleeding in major trauma with pelvic and/or acetabular fractures: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

The Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST) is a tool to rapidly detect intraabdominal and intrapericardial fluid with point-of-care ultrasound. Previous studies have questioned the role of FAST in patients with pelvic fractures. The aim of the present study was to assess the accuracy of FAST to detect clinically significant intraabdominal hemorrhage in patients with pelvic fractures.

METHODS

We included all consecutive patients with pelvic and/or acetabular fractures treated our Level 1 trauma center from 2009-2020. We registered patient and fracture characteristics, FAST investigations and CT descriptions, explorative laparotomy findings, and transfusion needs. We compared FAST to CT and laparotomy findings, and calculated true positive and negative findings, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV).

RESULTS

We included 389 patients. FAST had a sensitivity of 75%, a specificity of 98%, a PPV of 84%, and a NPV of 96% for clinically significant intraabdominal bleeding. Patients with retroperitoneal hematomas were at increased risk for laparotomy both because of True-negative FAST and False-positive FAST.

CONCLUSION

FAST is accurate to identify clinically significant intraabdominal blood in patients with severe pelvic fractures and should be a standard asset in these patients. Retroperitoneal hematomas challenge the FAST interpretation and thus the decision making when applying FAST in patients with pelvic fractures.

Prehospital ultrasound scanning for abdominal free fluid detection in trauma patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Focused assessment with sonography for trauma helps detect abdominal free fluid. Prehospital ultrasound scanning is also important because the early diagnosis of hemoperitoneum may reduce the time to definitive treatment in the hospital. This study investigated whether prehospital ultrasound scanning can help detect abdominal free fluid.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this systematic review, relevant databases were searched for studies investigating prehospital ultrasound examinations for abdominal free fluid in trauma patients. The prehospital ultrasound results were compared with computed tomography, surgery, or hospital ultrasound examination data. The pooled sensitivity and specificity values were analyzed using forest plots. The overall predictive power was calculated by the summary receiver operating characteristic curve. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies tool. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) was performed to assess the certainty of evidence.

RESULT

This meta-analysis comprised six studies that included 1356 patients. The pooled sensitivity and specificity values were 0.596 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.345-0.822) and 0.970 (95% CI = 0.953-0.983), respectively. The pooled area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.998. The quality assessment tool showed favorable results. In the GRADE analysis, the quality of evidence was very low for sensitivity and high for specificity when prehospital ultrasound was used for hemoperitoneum diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

The specificity of abdominal free fluid detection using prehospital ultrasound examinations in trauma patients was very high.

Use of Automated Machine Learning for Classifying Hemoperitoneum on Ultrasonographic Images of Morrison's Pouch: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

This study evaluated automated machine learning (AutoML) in classifying the presence or absence of hemoperitoneum in ultrasonography (USG) images of Morrison's pouch. In this multicenter, retrospective study, 864 trauma patients from trauma and emergency medical centers in South Korea were included. In all, 2200 USG images (1100 hemoperitoneum and 1100 normal) were collected. Of these, 1800 images were used for training and 200 were used for the internal validation of AutoML. External validation was performed using 100 hemoperitoneum images and 100 normal images collected separately from a trauma center that were not included in the training and internal validation sets. Google's open-source AutoML was used to train the algorithm in classifying hemoperitoneum in USG images, followed by internal and external validation. In the internal validation, the sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve were 95%, 99%, and 0.97, respectively. In the external validation, the sensitivity, specificity, and AUROC were 94%, 99%, and 0.97, respectively. The performances of AutoML in the internal and external validation were not statistically different (p = 0.78). A publicly available, general-purpose AutoML can accurately classify the presence or absence of hemoperitoneum in USG images of the Morrison's pouch of real-world trauma patients.

The role of prehospital ultrasound in reducing time to definitive care in abdominal trauma patients with moderate to severe liver and spleen injuries

BACKGROUND

The role of prehospital focused assessment sonography for trauma (FAST) is still under debate and no definitive recommendations are available in actual guidelines, moreover, the availability of ultrasound machines in emergency medical services (EMS) is still inhomogeneous. On the other hand, time to definitive care is strictly related to survival in bleeding trauma patients. This study aimed at investigating if a positive prehospital FAST in abdominal trauma patients could have a role in reducing door-to-CT scan or door-to-operating room (OR) time.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study included all the patients affected by an abdominal trauma with an abdominal abbreviated injury score ≥ 2 and a spleen or liver injury admitted to Maggiore Hospital Carlo Alberto Pizzardi, a level 1 trauma centre between 2014 and 2019. Prehospital and emergency department (ED) clinical and laboratory variables were collected, as well as in-hospital times during the diagnostic and therapeutic pathways of these patients.

RESULTS

199 patients were included in the final analysis. Of these, 44 had a prehospital FAST performed and in 27 of them, peritoneal free fluid was detected in the prehospital setting, while 128 out of 199 patients had a positive ED-FAST. Sensitivity was 62.9% (95% CI: 42.4%-80.6%) and specificity 100% (95% CI: 80.5% - 100%). Patients with a positive prehospital FAST reported a significantly lower door-to-CT or door-to-OR median time (46 vs 69 min, p < 0.001). Prehospital hypotension and Glasgow coma scale, first arterial blood lactate, ISS, age, positive prehospital and ED FAST were inserted in a stepwise selection for a multivariable Cox proportional regression hazards model. Only ISS and prehospital FAST resulted significantly associated with a reduction in the door-to-CT scan or door-to-operating theatre time in the multivariable model.

CONCLUSION

Prehospital FAST information of intraperitoneal free fluid could significantly hasten door-to-CT scan or door-to-operating theatre time in abdominal trauma patients if established hospital response protocols are available.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, (Therapeutic / Care Management).

Hemoperitoneum After Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients: A Tale of Two Cases

End-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients are at much higher risk of cardiac arrest as compared to the general population. In the event of a cardiac arrest, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is a lifesaving procedure. In fact, the need for CPR among hospitalized ESRD patients is almost 20 times higher than the general population. Complications of CPR include thoracic injuries such as flail chest, rib fractures, pneumothorax, and rarely intra-abdominal complications. Hemoperitoneum is a well-recognized complication among peritoneal dialysis patients but as a complication of CPR is rarely described. Inappropriate CPR technique, hepatic ischemia and venous congestion, platelet dysfunction, and the use of anti-platelet agents can increase the risk of such injury and bleeding. Hemoperitoneum in this setting can be serious with significant complications and may require transition from peritoneal dialysis (PD) to hemodialysis. We report two such PD patients who developed hemoperitoneum as a complication after CPR and their course.

FAST accuracy in major pelvic fractures for decision-making of abdominal exploration: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Major pelvic fractures are often associated with intra-abdominal organ injuries. Considering patients’ hemodynamic status, Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST) can facilitate decision-making for abdominal exploration. Non-therapeutic exploratory laparotomy from pelvic fractures should be avoided. Aim of this study is to determine the accuracy of FAST in diagnosing significant intraabdominal hemorrhage that leads to determine whether or not to pursue therapeutic abdominal exploration in patients with major pelvic fractures.

Material and methods

We systematically reviewed the PubMed and SCOPUS databases from 2009 to 2019 and also using a retrospective review of patients admitted to the Acute Care Surgery service from 2016 to 2019. We performed a meta-analysis by using a random effects model.

Results

A total 677 patients were analyzed, 28 cases from our hospital. Mean patient age was 40.8 years. Leading mechanism of injury were motor vehicle collision (44.72%), fall from height (13.41%), and motorcycle collision (13.69%). Average injury severity score (ISS) was 32.5 (range: 24.1–50), and overall mortality rate was 11.65%. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of FAST to identify significant intra-abdominal hemorrhage was 79%,90%, and 93%, respectively (95% confidence interval: 89%–94%). Meta-regression revealed no significant correlation between injury severity score and the accuracy of FAST.

Conclusion

Our meta-analysis revealed that FAST in major pelvic fracture accurately detected significant intra-abdominal hemorrhage. Using FAST in the presence of unstable hemodynamics, we can decide to perform abdominal exploration with the expectation of finding significant intra-abdominal hemorrhage require surgically control.

•

Pelvic fractures is limiting the accuracy of FAST because free fluid from a major pelvic fracture could be retroperitoneal hematoma entering the transperitoneal plane into the peritoneal space or intraperitoneal free fluid (hemoperitoneum or uroperitoneum) caused by significant intra-abdominal organ injury.

•

Using FAST in the presence of unstable hemodynamics, we can decide to perform abdominal exploration with the expectation of finding significant intra-abdominal hemorrhage require surgically control.

•

Major pelvic fracture with initial FAST negative results, whole-abdomen CT still should be performed to detect occult injury, such as diaphragmatic injuries or hallow viscus organ injuries, which could be missed.

Diagnostic performance of the extended focused assessment with sonography for trauma (EFAST) patients in a tertiary care hospital of Nepal

Background

Thoracoabdominal trauma presents a diagnostic challenge for the emergency physician. The introduction of bedside ultrasonography (USG) provides a screening tool to detect hemoperitoneum, hemothorax, pneumothorax and pericardial effusion in torso injuries.

Aim

To evaluate the accuracy of extended focused assessment with sonography for trauma (EFAST) for chest and abdominal injuries performed by first responders in a tertiary care hospital of Nepal.

Methods

This was a prospective study including all trauma patients who obtained either an Injury Severity Score ≥15 or direct trauma to the trunk in 1 year period in the emergency department (ED) of Dhulikhel Hospital-Kathmandu University Hospital. The results of the EFAST were then compared with contrast-enhanced CT (CECT), radiology ultrasound (USG)/chest X-ray, or intraoperative findings when the EFAST was positive. The negative EFAST cases were observed for a minimum of 4 hours in the ED. Descriptive statistics and sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy were calculated.

Results

Out of 267 cases, 261 patients underwent an EFAST examination. The sensitivity and specificity were 94.8% and 99.5%, respectively. The negative predictive value was 98.53% whereas the positive predictive value was 98.21%. The overall accuracy was 99.4%.

Conclusion

The results of this study suggest that EFAST examination performed by first-line healthcare providers is a useful method for assessment of thoracic and abdominal injuries. EFAST was found to have a high specificity (99.5%) and positive predictive value (98.21%) which indicates that it is an effective technique for detecting intra-abdominal or thoracic injuries. However, the effectiveness of EFAST is limited by its being operator dependent, and thereby human error. For negative EFAST cases, we recommend a monitoring period of at least 4 hours, serial fast scan, or further investigation through other methods such as a CECT.

Level of evidence

Level I

Abdominal prehospital ultrasound impacts treatment decisions in a Dutch Helicopter Emergency Medical Service

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the impact of abdominal prehospital ultrasound (PHUS) on patient care in a Dutch physician-staffed Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS) and to determine its diagnostic performance.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We carried out a retrospective analysis of abdominal ultrasound (US) examinations performed by the HEMS of Nijmegen, the Netherlands, from January 2007 until December 2016. Data including patient demographics, type of incident, abdominal US findings, impact on treatment decisions, and the physicians' narrative report were retrieved from the HEMS database and analyzed. PHUS diagnostic performance was compared with computed tomography scan or laparotomy.

RESULTS

Of 17 077 recorded scrambles and 8699 patients treated, 1583 underwent 1631 abdominal US examinations. After eliminating missing data, 251 impacts on treatment in 194 out of 1539 PHUS examinations were identified (12.6%, 95% confidence interval: 10.9-14.3). This affected 188 out of 1495 (12.6%) patients. The four main categories of treatment decisions impacted by PHUS were information provided to the destination hospital (45.4%); mode of transportation (23.5%); choice of destination hospital (13.1%); and fluid management (11.6%). The sensitivity of prehospital abdominal US for hemoperitoneum was 31.3%, specificity was 96.7%, and accuracy was 82.1%.

CONCLUSION

Abdominal PHUS in our setting impacts treatment decisions significantly. Therefore, it is a valuable tool in the Dutch HEMS setting and probably beyond.

Emergency Focused Assessment with Sonography in Blunt Trauma Abdomen

Background:

Focused assessment with sonography in trauma (FAST) being a rapid noninvasive examination is used primarily to evaluate for the evidence of traumatic free fluid suggestive of injury in the peritoneal, pericardial, and pleural cavities. It is widely recognized as a mainstream emergency skill in the management of trauma.

Aim:

The aim of the study is to evaluate the accuracy of FAST in patients presenting with blunt abdominal trauma.

Methods:

Data were collected prospectively from FAST scans conducted in blunt trauma abdomen (BTA) patients. Positive and negative FAST scans were confirmed either with contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) abdomen or with exploratory laparotomy, thus dividing it further into four groups, i.e., true-positive, false-positive, true-negative, and false-negative scans. After collecting the data, accuracy of FAST was calculated.

Results:

In this study, a total of 104 patients were included. The mean age was 38.17 years. Most common cause of BTA was road traffic accident. The overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of FAST were 69.8%, 92.1%, and 80.8%, respectively.

Conclusion:

This study showed that FAST is of paramount importance in patients who are hemodynamically unstable as it has a high positive predictive value. However, a FAST-negative result should always be confirmed by other modalities.

Diagnostic accuracy of eFAST in the trauma patient: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives

Performing an extended Focused Assessment with Sonography in Trauma (eFAST) exam is common practice in the initial assessment of trauma patients. The objective of this study was to systematically review the published literature on diagnostic accuracy of all components of the eFAST exam.

Methods

We searched Medline and Embase from inception through October 2018, for diagnostic studies examining the sensitivity and specificity of the eFAST exam. After removal of duplicates, 767 records remained for screening, of which 119 underwent full text review. Meta-DiSc™ software was used to create pooled sensitivities and specificities for included studies. Study quality was assessed using the Quality in Prognostic Studies (QUADAS-2) tool.

Results

Seventy-five studies representing 24,350 patients satisfied our selection criteria. Studies were published between 1989 and 2017. Pooled sensitivities and specificities were calculated for the detection of pneumothorax (69% and 99% respectively), pericardial effusion (91% and 94% respectively), and intra-abdominal free fluid (74% and 98% respectively). Sub-group analysis was completed for detection of intra-abdominal free fluid in hypotensive (sensitivity 74% and specificity 95%), adult normotensive (sensitivity 76% and specificity 98%) and pediatric patients (sensitivity 71% and specificity 95%).

Conclusions

Our systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that e-FAST is a useful bedside tool for ruling in pneumothorax, pericardial effusion, and intra-abdominal free fluid in the trauma setting. Its usefulness as a rule-out tool is not supported by these results.

Can an 8th grade student learn point of care ultrasound?

BACKGROUND

Point-of-care ultrasound has gained widespread use in developing countries due to decreased cost and improved telemedicine capabilities. Ultrasound training, specifically image acquisition skills, is occurring with more frequency in non-medical personnel with varying educational levels in these underdeveloped areas. This study evaluates if students without a high school education can be trained to acquire useful FAST images, and to determine if an 8^th grade student can teach peers these skills.

METHODS

The 8^th grade students at a small middle school were divided into two groups. One group received training by a certified medical sonographer, while the other group received training by a peer 8^th grade student trainer who had previously received training by the sonographer. After training, each student was independently tested by scanning the four FAST locations. A blinded ultrasound expert evaluated these images and deemed each image adequate or inadequate for clinical use.

RESULTS

Eighty video image clips were obtained. The overall image adequacy rate was 74%. The splenorenal window had the highest rate at 95%, followed by retrovesical at 90%, hepatorenal at 75%, and subxiphoid cardiac at 35%. The adequacy rate of the sonographer-trained group was 78%, while the adequacy rate of the student-trained group was 70%. The difference in image adequacy rate between the two groups was not significant (P-value 0.459).

CONCLUSION

The majority of 8^th graders obtained clinically adequate FAST images after minimal training. Additionally, the student-trained group performed as well as the sonographer-trained group.

Point-of-care ultrasonography for diagnosing thoracoabdominal injuries in patients with blunt trauma

BACKGROUND

Point-of-care sonography (POCS) has emerged as the screening modality of choice for suspected body trauma in many emergency departments worldwide. Its best known application is FAST (focused abdominal sonography for trauma). The technology is almost ubiquitously available, can be performed during resuscitation, and does not expose patients or staff to radiation. While many authors have stressed the high specificity of POCS, its sensitivity varied markedly across studies. This review aimed to compile the current best evidence about the diagnostic accuracy of POCS imaging protocols in the setting of blunt thoracoabdominal trauma.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of POCS for detecting and excluding free fluid, organ injuries, vascular lesions, and other injuries (e.g. pneumothorax) compared to a diagnostic reference standard (i.e. computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), thoracoscopy or thoracotomy, laparoscopy or laparotomy, autopsy, or any combination of these) in patients with blunt trauma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to July 2017) and Ovid Embase (1974 to July 2017), as well as PubMed (1947 to July 2017), employing a prospectively defined literature and data retrieval strategy. We also screened the Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and BIOSIS for potentially relevant citations, and scanned the reference lists of full-text papers for articles missed by the electronic search. We performed a top-up search on 6 December 2018, and identified eight new studies which may be incorporated into the first update of this review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We assessed studies for eligibility using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. We included either prospective or retrospective diagnostic cohort studies that enrolled patients of any age and gender who sustained any type of blunt injury in a civilian scenario. Eligible studies had to provide sufficient information to construct a 2 x 2 table of diagnostic accuracy to allow for calculating sensitivity, specificity, and other indices of diagnostic test accuracy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts of reports using a prespecified data extraction form. Methodological quality of individual studies was rated by the QUADAS-2 instrument (the revised and updated version of the original Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies list of items). We calculated sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CI), tabulated the pairs of sensitivity and specificity with CI, and depicted these estimates by coupled forest plots using Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5). For pooling summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity, and investigating heterogeneity across studies, we fitted a bivariate model using Stata 14.0.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 34 studies with 8635 participants in this review. Summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity were 0.74 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.81) and 0.96 (95% CI 0.94 to 0.98). Pooled positive and negative likelihood ratios were estimated at 18.5 (95% CI 10.8 to 40.5) and 0.27 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.37), respectively. There was substantial heterogeneity across studies, and the reported accuracy of POCS strongly depended on the population and affected body area. In children, pooled sensitivity of POCS was 0.63 (95% CI 0.46 to 0.77), as compared to 0.78 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.84) in an adult or mixed population. Associated specificity in children was 0.91 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.96) and in an adult or mixed population 0.97 (95% CI 0.96 to 0.99). For abdominal trauma, POCS had a sensitivity of 0.68 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.75) and a specificity of 0.95 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.97). For chest injuries, sensitivity and specificity were calculated at 0.96 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.99) and 0.99 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.00). If we consider the results of all 34 included studies in a virtual population of 1000 patients, based on the observed median prevalence (pretest probability) of thoracoabdominal trauma of 28%, POCS would miss 73 patients with injuries and falsely suggest the presence of injuries in another 29 patients. Furthermore, in a virtual population of 1000 children, based on the observed median prevalence (pretest probability) of thoracoabdominal trauma of 31%, POCS would miss 118 children with injuries and falsely suggest the presence of injuries in another 62 children.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In patients with suspected blunt thoracoabdominal trauma, positive POCS findings are helpful for guiding treatment decisions. However, with regard to abdominal trauma, a negative POCS exam does not rule out injuries and must be verified by a reference test such as CT. This is of particular importance in paediatric trauma, where the sensitivity of POCS is poor. Based on a small number of studies in a mixed population, POCS may have a higher sensitivity in chest injuries. This warrants larger, confirmatory trials to affirm the accuracy of POCS for diagnosing thoracic trauma.

Diagnostic accuracy of Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma for blunt abdominal trauma in the Eastern Region of Saudi Arabia

Objectives:

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST) in blunt abdominal trauma caused by motor vehicle accidents at our Hospital in Dhahran city.

Methods:

This descriptive, observational study was conducted in the Radiology Department at King Fahad Military Medical Complex Dhahran, Saudi Arabia between September 2016 and September 2017. All adult patients (n=105) involved in motor vehicle accidents with blunt abdominal injury on presentation were retrospectively reviewed for FAST and CT scans for detection of free fluid. Focused assessment with sonography for trauma studies were conducted or supervised by senior registrar of general surgery (trauma team leader). Computed tomography findings were reviewed by 2 experienced radiologists. High and low-grade solid abdominal visceral (liver, spleen, kidney) injuries were identified on CT scans. Focused assessment with sonography for trauma and CT scan findings were identified as ‘positive’ and ‘negative’ for presence and absence of free fluid respectively. Outcomes of FAST were presented on a 2x2 contingency table.

Results:

Sensitivity of FAST in detecting intraperitoneal free fluid was calculated as 76.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 64.14-85.69%), specificity 84.2% (95% CI, 68.75-93.98%) and accuracy 79% (95% CI, 70.01-86.38%). Focused assessment with sonography for trauma detected free fluid in most cases of high-grade solid visceral injuries. Nearly half of true-negative cases were having low grade visceral or other injuries.

Conclusion:

Focused assessment with sonography for trauma is an important tool in initial assessment of suspected blunt abdominal injury patients with high sensitivity and specificity. A negative FAST does not exclude low grade solid visceral or other injuries.

Comparative Analysis of Simulated versus Live Patient-Based FAST (Focused Assessment With Sonography for Trauma) Training

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether simulated patient (SP)-based training has comparable efficacy as live patient (LP)-based training in teaching Focused Abdominal Sonography for Trauma (FAST) knowledge and skill competencies to surgical residents.

DESIGN

A randomized pretest/intervention/posttest controlled study design was employed to compare the participants' performance in written and practical examinations regarding FAST examination after SP-based versus LP-based training.

SETTING

University-based general residency program at a single institution.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 29 general surgery residents of various training levels and sonographic experience were recruited by convenience sampling.

RESULTS

There was no correlation between subjects' baseline training level or sonographic experience with either the posttest-pretest score difference or the percentage of subjects getting all 4 windows with adequate quality. There was no significant difference between the improvement in written posttest-pretest scores for SP and LP group, which were 33 ± 9.6 and 31 ± 6.8 (p = 0.40), respectively. With regard to performance-based learning efficacy, a statistically higher proportion of subjects were able to obtain all 4 windows with adequate quality among the LP than the SP group (6/8 vs 1/8, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

SP- and LP-based FAST training for surgical residents were associated with similar knowledge-based competency acquisition, but residents receiving LP-based training were better at acquiring adequate FAST windows on live patients. Simulation training appeared to be a valid adjunct to LP practice but cannot replace LP training. Future investigations on how to improve simulation fidelity and its training efficacy for skill-based competencies are warranted.

Should we perform a FAST exam in haemodynamically stable patients presenting after blunt abdominal injury: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Focussed Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST) is a bedside ultrasonography technique used to detect free intraperitoneal fluid in patients presenting with blunt abdominal trauma (BAT) in the emergency department.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study we investigated the potential of FAST as a risk stratification instrument in haemodynamically (HD) stable patients presenting after BAT by establishing the association between the FAST exam result and final outcome. An adverse outcome was defined in this context as the need for either a laparoscopy/laparotomy or an angiographic embolization or death due to abdominal injuries).

Results

A total of 421 patients with BAT were included, of which nine had an adverse outcome (2%). FAST was negative in 407 patients. Six of them turned out to have free intraperitoneal fluid (sensitivity 67 [41–86]%). FAST was positive in 14 patients, 12 of whom had free intraperitoneal fluid (specificity 99 [98–100]%). A positive FAST (positive likelihood ratio 34.3 [15.1–78.5]) was stronger associated with an adverse outcome than Injury Severity Score (ISS) or any individual clinical- or biochemical variables measured at presentation in the ED.

Discussion

The FAST exam can provide valuable prognostic information at minimal expenses during the early stages of resuscitation in haemodynamically stable patients presenting with BAT.

Conclusions

FAST exam should not be omitted in patients with BAT.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13049-016-0342-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.