Prospective Evaluation of Point-of-Care Ultrasound at a Remote, Multi-Day Music Festival

Glastonbury Festival: Medical Care at the World's Largest Greenfield Music Festival

INTRODUCTION

Music festivals have become an increasingly popular form of mass-gathering event, drawing an increasing number of attendees across the world each year. While festivals exist to provide guests with an enjoyable experience, there have been instances of serious illness, injury, and in some cases death. Large crowds, prolonged exposure to loud music, and high rates of drug and alcohol consumption can pose a dangerous environment for guests as well as those looking after them.

METHODS

A retrospective review of electronic patient records (EPRs) at the 2022 Glastonbury Festival was undertaken. All patients who attended medical services on-site during the festival and immediately after were included. Patient demographics, diagnosis, treatment received, and discharge destination were obtained and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 2,828 patients received on-site medical care. The patient presentation rate (PPR) was 13.47 and the transport-to-hospital rate (TTHR) was 0.30 per 1,000 guests. The most common diagnoses were joint injuries, gastrointestinal conditions, and blisters. Only 164 patients (5.48%) were diagnosed as being intoxicated. Overall, 552 patients (19.52%) were prescribed a medication to take away and 268 (9.48%) had a dressing for a minor wound. One patient (0.04%) underwent a general anesthetic and no patients required cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Most patients were discharged back to the festival site (2,563; 90.66%).

DISCUSSION

Minor conditions were responsible for many presentations and most patients only required mild or non-invasive interventions, after which they could be safely discharged back to the festival. Older adults were diagnosed with a different frequency of conditions compared to the overall study population, something not reported previously. Intoxicated patients only accounted for a very small amount of the medical workload.

Past and Present of Point-of-Care Ultrasound (PoCUS): A Narrative Review

This article aims to conduct a literature review to gain insight into point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS). PoCUS is a rapid, accurate, non-invasive, and radiation-free imaging modality that can be used in stable and unstable patients. PoCUS can be performed parallel to physical examination, resuscitation, and stabilization; repeated exams in critical patients are essential for improving sensitivity. The review highlights how PoCUS, which was initially used to detect free intraperitoneal fluid in trauma patients, has developed into a life-saving diagnostic tool that could be utilized by treating physicians during various stages of diagnosis, resuscitation, operation, and postoperative critical care when managing sick patients. The review also notes the barriers to the widespread uptake of PoCUS in general internal medicine and the recent commercial availability of "pocket" or handheld probes that have made PoCUS more readily available. This review concludes that adopting a focused binary decision-making approach can maximize PoCUS's value in many clinical settings, including emergency departments, intensive care units, and operation theatres. Overall, the review emphasizes the importance of awareness of common indications, limitations, and strengths of this evolving and promising technology to determine its future trajectory: Providing comprehensive PoCUS training within internal medicine curriculums and supporting trainers to do so.

Tele-Mentored Handheld Ultrasound System for General Practitioners: A Prospective, Descriptive Study in Remote and Rural Communities

BACKGROUND

Rural general practitioners (GPs) have insufficient diagnostic information to deal with complex clinical scenarios due to the inequality in medical imaging resources in rural and remote communities. The objective of this study is to explore the value of a tele-mentored handheld ultrasound (tele-HHUS) system, allowing GPs to provide ultrasound (US) services in rural and remote communities.

METHODS

Overall, 708 patients underwent tele-HHUS examination between March and October 2021 and March and April 2022 across thirteen primary hospitals and two tertiary-care general hospitals. All US examinations were guided and supervised remotely in real time by US experts more than 300 km away using the tele-HHUS system. The following details were recorded: location of tele-HHUS scanning, primary complaints, clinical diagnosis, and US findings. The recommendations (referral or follow-up) based on clinical experience alone were compared with those based on clinical experience with tele-HHUS information.

RESULTS

Tele-HHUS examinations were performed both in hospital settings (90.6%, 642/708) and out of hospital settings (9.4%, 66/708). Leaving aside routine physical examinations, flank pain (14.2%, 91/642) was the most common complaint in inpatients, while chest distress (12.1%, 8/66) and flank discomfort (12.1%, 8/66) were the most common complaints in out-of-hospital settings. Additionally, the referral rate increased from 5.9% to 8.3% (kappa = 0.202; p = 0.000).

CONCLUSIONS

The tele-HHUS system can help rural GPs perform HHUS successfully in remote and rural communities. This novel mobile telemedicine model is valuable in resource-limited areas.

CLINICAL AND HEALTHCARE IMPACTS OF PORTABLE ULTRASONOGRAPHY IN AMBULATORY CARE MUSCULOSKELETAL REHABILITATION CONSULTATIONS

Objective

We evaluated the impact of Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in musculoskeletal consultations out of hospital using a Philips Lumify portable ultrasound device. We aimed to determine the impact of POCUS on the number of hospital referrals for injections as well as on the number of injections performed in consultation.

Design

Retrospective case study comparing 2 periods: June to September 2021 (pre-POCUS) and November 2021 to February 2022 (POCUS). Statistical comparisons were performed using the χ2. In both periods, 21 medical consultations were performed. In the pre-POCUS period, 470 patients were assessed, with an average of 1.29 hospital referrals made per day of consultation for hospital injections and an average of 2.05 injections performed per day of medical consultation. In the POCUS period, 589 patients were assessed, with an average of 0.1 hospital referrals per day (-92.6%; p < 0.00001) and an average of 2.76 injections performed per day (+34.9%; p < 0.00001). The introduction of POCUS at our practice reduced the number of hospital referrals made for injections and increased the number of injections performed every day of consultation.

Conclusion

This suggests that POCUS is of great clinical value in out-of-hospital musculoskeletal rehabilitation consultations.

Seasonal Variation of Use of Common Psychedelics and Party Drugs Among Nightclub/Festival Attendees in New York City

Few epidemiological studies have focused on seasonal variation in the use of common psychedelics and party drugs among nightclub and festival attendees, typically those who attend electronic dance music (EDM) events. We sought to determine whether the use of different drug types varies seasonally within this population. Across 15 seasons from summer 2017 through fall 2022, we surveyed 3,935 adults entering randomly selected nightclubs and festivals in New York City regarding their past-month use of cocaine, MDMA (3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine, commonly known as ecstasy), lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), psilocybin (shrooms), and ketamine. Multivariable models were used to compare adjusted odds ratios for drug use within each season with the grand mean of combined seasons. Summer was associated with higher odds for use of LSD (aOR 2.72; 95% CI, 1.88-3.93) and psilocybin (aOR 1.65; CI, 1.12-2.43), independent of increases in psilocybin use over time (p < .001). A significant increase in use of ketamine (p = .014) and significant decreases in use of cocaine (p = .002) and ecstasy (p = .002) were found across time, but multivariable models did not detect seasonal variations. Summer is a risk factor for use of common psychedelics among people who attend EDM events. Therefore, the summer months may be the best time to disseminate information about harm reduction for psychedelic drug users.

Ambulatory Use of Handheld Point-of-Care Ultrasound (HH-POCUS) in Rural Brandenburg - A Pilot Study

PURPOSE

 This study aims to evaluate the use of handheld ultrasound devices (HHUS) for point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) to improve outpatient care in rural Brandenburg.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 A group of general practitioners (n = 9), palliative care physicians (n = 6), emergency physicians (n = 4), and nurses from palliative care services (n = 5) participated in this study. Following a 3-hour workshop and 2 weeks of individual training, participants performed POCUS using HHUS (HH-POCUS). Indications, examination results, and resulting treatment changes (e. g., acute interventions, new medication) were documented in a standardized data entry form.

RESULTS

 19 physicians with different ultrasound experience and 5 palliative care nurses attended the workshop program and took part in the study. Three of the participating physicians were out of training in ultrasound and received prolonged supervision. Among 427 HH-POCUS examinations, the FAST scan and kidney scan were performed most often. Pain and dyspnea were the most common indications for HH-POCUS. Among the examinations performed by physicians (n = 311), ascites was the most common pathology (27 % of cases). Using a simplified examination protocol, palliative care nurses diagnosed fluid collections, hydronephrosis and transurethral catheter position or urinary retention. In 80.4 % of physician-performed cases, HH-POCUS made a valuable impact on patient management. HH-POCUS contributed to treatment decisions in 49.5 % of cases, including a change of medication in 29.6 % and performance of therapeutic interventions in 19.9 %. Hospital admission or referral to an ambulatory specialist was initiated due to HH-POCUS findings in 17.7 % of patients.

CONCLUSION

 HH-POCUS helped doctors in rural areas to optimize patient care through rapid on-site collection of therapeutically relevant findings. In addition, it was shown that specialized and motivated nurses can independently detect simple ultrasound findings and thus provide clinically relevant information to doctors.

Effect of Point-of-Care Ultrasound on Clinical Outcomes in Low-Resource Settings: A Systematic Review

Despite the potential for improved patient care, little is known of the true effect of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) on patient outcomes in resource-limited settings. Electronic databases were searched using medical subject heading and free text terms related to POCUS and resource-limited settings through August 2020. Two authors independently selected studies, assessed methodological quality using the Downs and Black scale and extracted data. Twenty observational studies were included in the final review. All studies had moderate to high risk of bias. No studies exhibited an effect on the pre-specified primary outcome of mortality. Varying degrees of change in differential diagnosis and management were reported, but definitions varied widely among studies. Estimates for change in diagnosis as a result of POCUS ranged from 15% to 52%, and those for change in management, from 17% to 87%. Articles on POCUS clinical utility represent a small part (4.6%) of the scholastic literature dedicated to POCUS in low-resource settings. POCUS is a valuable intervention to consider in resource-limited settings, with the potential to change diagnosis and patient management. The exact magnitude of effect remains unknown. There is a continued need for large-scale experimental studies to investigate the effect of POCUS on patient diagnosis, management and mortality.

Characterizing the biomechanical differences between novice and expert point-of-care ultrasound practitioners using a low-cost gyroscope and accelerometer integrated sensor: A pilot study

Introduction

Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has become an important diagnostic tool in acute care medicine; however, little is known about the biomechanical differences between novice and expert practitioners.

Methods

A low-cost ($50 CAD) gyroscope and accelerometer integrated sensor was assembled and affixed to an ultrasound probe. Seventeen participants, nine novices and eight experts, were recruited to perform three abdominal and four cardiac scans on a standardized patient. Participant demographics, time per scan, average acceleration, average angular velocity, decay in acceleration and angular velocity over time, and frequency of probe movements were analyzed. Video capture with blinded video review was scored.

Results

On video review, experts had higher image optimization and acquisition scores for both abdominal and cardiac scans. Experts had shorter scan times for abdominal (7 s vs. 26 s, p = 0.003) and cardiac (11 s vs. 26 s, p < 0.001) scans. There was no difference in average acceleration (g) between novices and experts performing abdominal (1.02 vs. 1.01, p = 0.50) and cardiac (1.01 vs. 1.01, p = 0.45) scans. Experts had lower angular velocity (°/s) for abdominal scans (10.00 vs. 18.73, p < 0.001) and cardiac scans (15.61 vs. 20.33, p = 0.02) There was a greater decay in acceleration over time for experts performing cardiac scans compared to novices (-0.194 vs. -0.050, p = 0.03) but not for abdominal scans or when measuring angular velocity. The frequency of movements (Hz) was higher for novices compared to experts for abdominal (16.68 vs. 13.79, p < 0.001) and cardiac (17.60 vs. 13.63, p = 0.002) scans.

Discussion

This study supports the feasibility of a low-cost gyroscope and accelerometer integrated sensor to quantify the biomechanics of POCUS. It may also support the concept of "window shopping" as a method by which experts obtain abdominal and cardiac views, where sliding is used to find an acoustic window, then smaller rocking and tilting probe movements are used to refine the image.

Potential for Use of Portable Ultrasound Devices in Rural and Remote Settings in Australia and Other Developed Countries: A Systematic Review

Introduction

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Blinding practices during acute point-of-care ultrasound research: the BLIND-US meta-research study

OBJECTIVES

Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) diagnostic accuracy research has significant variation in blinding practices. This study characterises the blinding practices during acute POCUS research to determine whether research methodology adequately reflects POCUS use in routine clinical practice.

DESIGN, SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS

A search for POCUS diagnostic accuracy studies published in Emergency Medicine, Anaesthesia and Critical Care journals from January 2016 to January 2020 was performed. Studies were included if they were primary diagnostic accuracy studies. The study year, journal impact factor, population, hospital area, body region, study design, blinding of the POCUS interpreter to clinical information, whether the person performing the POCUS scan was the same person interpreting the scan, and whether the study reported incremental diagnostic yield were extracted in duplicate by two authors. Descriptive statistics were provided and prespecified subgroup analysis was performed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the number of studies that blinded the POCUS interpreter to at least some part of the clinical information. Secondary outcomes included whether the person performing the POCUS scan was the same person interpreting it and whether the study reported incremental diagnostic yield.

RESULTS

520 abstracts were screened with 97 studies included. The POCUS interpreter was blinded to clinical information in 37 studies (38.1%), not blinded in 34 studies (35.1%) and not reported in 26 studies (26.8%). The POCUS interpreter was the same person obtaining the images in 72 studies (74.2%), different in 14 studies (14.4%) and not reported in 11 studies (11.3%). Only four studies (4.1%) reported incremental diagnostic yield for POCUS. Inter-rater reliability was moderate (k=0.64). Subgroup analysis based on impact factor, body region, hospital area, patient population and study design did not show significant differences after completing pairwise comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

Although blinding the POCUS interpreter to clinical information may be done in a perceived attempt to limit bias, this may result in accuracy estimates that do not reflect routine clinical practice. Similarly, having a different clinician perform and interpret the POCUS scan significantly limits generalisability to practice as it does not truly reflect 'point-of-care' ultrasound at all. Reporting incremental diagnostic yield from implementing POCUS into a diagnostic pathway better reflects the value of POCUS; however, this methodology was infrequently used.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

The study protocol was registered on Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/h5fe7/).

The Use of Handheld Ultrasound Devices in Emergency Medicine

Purpose of Review

Ultraportable handheld ultrasound (HHU) devices are being rapidly adopted by emergency medicine (EM) physicians. Though knowledge of the breadth of their utility and functionality is still limited compared to cart-based systems, these machines are becoming more common due to ease-of-use, extreme affordability, and improving technology.

Recent Findings

Images obtained with HHU are comparable to those obtained with traditional machines but create unique issues regarding billing and data management. HHU devices are increasingly used successfully to augment the education of practitioners-in-training, by emergency physicians in austere environments, and in the burgeoning fields of "tele-ultrasound" and augmented reality scanning.

Summary

This review seeks to describe the current state of use of HHU devices in the emergency department (ED) including device overview, institutional concerns, unique areas of use, recent literature since their adoption into clinical EM, and their future potential.

Completeness of reporting for systematic reviews of point-of-care ultrasound: a meta-research study

OBJECTIVES

Systematic reviews are often considered among the highest quality of evidence. Completely reported systematic reviews, however, are required so readers can assess for generalisability of the research to practice and risk of bias. The objective of this study was to assess the completeness of reporting for systematic reviews assessing the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses for Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA) checklist that was published in 2018.

DESIGN AND SETTING

In this meta-research study, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases were searched, with no date restriction, on March 1st, 2020 for systematic reviews assessing the diagnostic accuracy of POCUS. Adherence to PRISMA-DTA for the main text and abstract was scored independently and in duplicate using a modified checklist. Prespecified subgroup analyses were performed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the mean PRISMA-DTA checklist adherence for the full-text and abstract.

RESULTS

A total of 71 studies published from 2008 to 2020 met the inclusion criteria. The overall adherence for the full-text was moderate: 19.8 out of 26.0 items (76%) and for the abstract was 7.0 out of 11.0 items (64%). Although many items in the PRISMA-DTA checklist were frequently reported, several were r infrequently reported (<33% of studies), including item 5 (protocol registration), item D2 (minimally acceptable test accuracy) and item 14 (variability in target condition, index test and reference standards). Subgroup analyses showed a higher PRISMA-DTA mean adherence (SD) for high impact journals (20.9 (2.52) vs 18.9 (1.95); p<0.001), studies including supplemental materials (20.6 (2.48) vs 18.9 (2.28); p=0.004), studies citing adherence to PRISMA reporting guidelines (20.4 (1.95) vs 19.0 (3.00); p=0.038) and studies published in journals endorsing PRISMA guidelines (20.2 (2.47) vs 18.6 (2.37); p=0.025). There was variable adherence based on journal of publication (p=0.006), but not for study population (adult vs paediatric vs mixed) (p=0.62), year of publication (p=0.94), body region (p=0.78) or country (p=0.40). There was no variability in abstract adherence based on whether the abstract was structured with subheadings or not (p=0.25). A Spearman's correlation found moderate correlation between higher word counts and abstractand full-text adherence (R=0.45, p<0.001 and R=0.38, p=0.001), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the reporting of POCUS diagnostic accuracy systematic reviews and meta-analyses was moderate. We identified deficits in several key areas including the preregistration of systematic reviews in an online repository, handling of multiple definitions of target conditions, index tests and reference standards and specifying minimally acceptable test accuracy. Prospective registration of reviews and detailed reporting as per PRISMA-DTA during the research process could improve reporting completeness. At an editorial level, word count and supplemental material limitations may impede reporting completeness, whereas endorsement of reporting guidelines on journal websites could improve reporting.

Measuring the Masses: The Current State of Mass-Gathering Medical Case Reporting (Paper 1)

INTRODUCTION

Case reports are commonly used to report the health outcomes of mass gatherings (MGs), and many published reports of MGs demonstrate substantial heterogeneity of included descriptors. As such, it is challenging to perform rigorous comparisons of health services and outcomes between similar and dissimilar events. The degree of variation in published reports has not yet been investigated.

OBJECTIVE

Examine patterns of post-event medical reporting in the existing literature and identify inconsistencies in reporting.

METHODS

A systematic review of case reports was conducted. Included were English studies, published between January 2009 and December 2018, in Prehospital and Disaster Medicine (PDM) or Current Sports Medicine Reports (CSMR). Analysis of each paper was used to develop a list of 27 categories of data.

RESULTS

Seventy-five studies were initially reviewed with 54 publications meeting the inclusion criteria. Forty-two were full case reports (78%) and 12 were conference proceedings (22%). Of the 27 categories of data studied, only 13 were consistently reported in more than 50% of publications. Reporting patterns included inconsistent use of terminology/language and variable retrievability of reports. Reporting on event descriptors, hazard and risk analysis, and clinical outcomes were also inconsistent.

DISCUSSION

Case reports are essential tools for researchers and event team members such as medical directors and event producers. The authors found that current case reports, in addition to being inconsistent in content, were generally descriptive rather than explanatory; that is, focused on describing the outcomes as opposed to exploring possible connections between context and health outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This paper quantifies and demonstrates the current state of heterogeneity in MG event reporting. This heterogeneity is a significant impediment to the functional use of published reports to further the science of MG planning and to improve health outcomes. Future work based on the insights gained from this analysis will aim to align and standardize reporting to improve the quality and value of event reporting.

Measuring the Masses: A Proposed Template for Post-Event Medical Reporting (Paper 4)

BACKGROUND

Standardizing and systematizing the reporting of health outcomes from mass gatherings (MGs) will improve the quality of data being reported. Setting minimum standards for case reporting is an important strategy for improving data quality. This paper is one of a series of papers focused on understanding the current state, and shaping the future state, of post-event case reporting.

METHODS

Multiple data sources were used in creating a lean, yet comprehensive list of essential reporting fields, including a: (1) literature synthesis drawn from analysis of 54 post-event case reports; (2) comparison of existing data models for MGs; (3) qualitative analysis of gaps in current case reports; and (4) set of data domains developed based on the preceding sources.

FINDINGS

Existing literature fails to consistently report variables that may be essential for not only describing the health outcomes of a given event, but also for explaining those outcomes. In the context of current and future state reporting, 25 essential variables were identified. The essential variables were organized according to four domains, including: (i) Event Domain; (ii) Hazard and Risk Domain; (iii) Capacity Domain; and (iv) Clinical Domain.

DISCUSSION

The authors propose a first-generation template for post-event medical reporting. This template standardizes the reporting of 25 essential variables. An accompanying data dictionary provides background and standardization for each of the essential variables. Of note, this template is lean and will develop over time, with input from the international MG community. In the future, additional groups of variables may be helpful as "overlays," depending on the event category and type.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper presents a template for post-event medical reporting. It is hoped that consistent reporting of essential variables will improve both data collection and the ability to make comparisons between events so that the science underpinning MG health can continue to advance.

Measuring the Masses: Domains Driving Data Collection and Analysis for the Health Outcomes of Mass Gatherings (Paper 3)

INTRODUCTION

Without a robust evidence base to support recommendations for medical services at mass gatherings (MGs), levels of care will continue to vary and preventable morbidity and mortality will exist. Accordingly, researchers and clinicians publish case reports and case series to capture and explain some of the health interventions, health outcomes, and host community impacts of MGs. Streamlining and standardizing post-event reporting for MG medical services and associated health outcomes could improve inter-event comparability, thereby supporting and promoting growth of the evidence base for this discipline. The present paper is focused on theory building, proposing a set of domains for data that may support increasingly comprehensive, yet lean, reporting on the health outcomes of MGs. This paper is paired with another presenting a proposal for a post-event reporting template.

METHODS

The conceptual categories of data presented are based on a textual analysis of 54 published post-event medical case reports and a comparison of the features of published data models for MG health outcomes.

FINDINGS

A comparison of existing data models illustrates that none of the models are explicitly informed by a conceptual lens. Based on an analysis of the literature reviewed, four data domains emerged. These included: (i) the Event Domain, (ii) the Hazard and Risk Domain, (iii) the Capacity Domain, and (iv) the Clinical Domain. These domains mapped to 16 sub-domains.

DISCUSSION

Data modelling for the health outcomes related to MGs is currently in its infancy. The proposed illustration is a set of operationally relevant data domains that apply equally to small, medium, and large-sized events. Further development of these domains could move the MG community forward and shift post-event health outcomes reporting in the direction of increasing consistency and comprehensiveness.

CONCLUSION

Currently, data collection and analysis related to understanding health outcomes arising from MGs is not informed by robust conceptual models. This paper is part of a series of nested papers focused on the future state of post-event medical reporting.

Barriers to reporting guideline adherence in point-of-care ultrasound research: a cross-sectional survey of authors and journal editors

OBJECTIVE

Although the literature supporting the use of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) continues to grow, incomplete reporting of primary diagnostic accuracy studies has previously been identified as a barrier to translating research into practice and to performing unbiased systematic reviews. This study assesses POCUS investigator and journal editor attitudes towards barriers to adhering to the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) 2015 guidelines.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS

Two separate surveys using a 5-point Likert scale were sent to POCUS study investigators and journal editors to assess for knowledge, attitude and behavioural barriers to the complete reporting of POCUS research. Respondents were identified based on a previous study assessing STARD 2015 adherence for POCUS studies published in emergency medicine, anaesthesia and critical care journals. Responses were anonymously linked to STARD 2015 adherence data from the previous study. Written responses were thematically grouped into the following categories: knowledge, attitude and behavioural barriers to quality reporting, or other. Likert response items are reported as median with IQRs.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the median Likert score for the investigator and editor surveys assessing knowledge, attitude and behavioural beliefs about barriers to adhering to the STARD 2015 guidelines.

RESULTS

The investigator survey response rate was 18/69 (26%) and the editor response rate was 5/21 (24%). Most investigator respondents were emergency medicine practitioners (13/21, 62%). Two-thirds of investigators were aware of the STARD 2015 guidelines (12/18, 67%) and overall agreed that incomplete reporting limits generalisability and the ability to detect risk of bias (median 4 (4, 5)). Investigators felt that the STARD 2015 guidelines were useful, easy to find and easy to use (median 4 (4, 4.25); median 4 (4, 4.25) and median 4 (3, 4), respectively). There was a shared opinion held by investigators and editors that the peer review process be primarily responsible for ensuring complete research reporting (median 4 (3, 4) and median 4 (3.75, 4), respectively). Three of 18 authors (17%) felt that the English publication language of STARD 2015 was a barrier to adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

Although investigators and editors recognise the importance of completely reported research, reporting quality is still a core issue for POCUS research. The shared opinion held by investigators and editors that the peer review process be primarily responsible for reporting quality is potentially problematic; we view completely reported research as an integral part of the research process that investigators are responsible for, with the peer review process serving as another additional layer of quality control. Endorsement of reporting guidelines by journals, auditing reporting guideline adherence during the peer review process and translation of STARD 2015 guidelines into additional languages may improve reporting completeness for the acute POCUS literature.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Open Science Framework Registry (https://osf.io/5pzxs/).

Ultrasound Use in the Prehospital Setting for Trauma: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Trauma is a leading cause of death in the United States. Ultrasound use in the prehospital environment has the potential to change trauma management. Although ultrasound use for prehospital trauma is increasing, the role of this modality is not clearly defined.

OBJECTIVES

We examined the use of prehospital ultrasound (PHUS) for trauma patients and the use by different provider types. Specific factors of interest were if prehospital ultrasound has been shown to improve providers' ability to recognize conditions that can be managed in the prehospital setting, treat these conditions, change transport destination, or improve overall mortality rates for trauma patients.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE/PubMed, EBSCOhost, Cochrane Library, and Embase medical literature databases for articles that addressed our outcomes. Abstracts and articles were examined and studies that did not specifically evaluate ultrasound in the prehospital setting for trauma and duplicates were eliminated. Studies included in this comprehensive review were assessed for the use of ultrasound in the prehospital setting to aid in the diagnosis, treatment, and transport of trauma patients. We also conducted an analysis of bias in the included articles. Due to the large heterogeneity in the included studies, no meta-analysis could be performed.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were identified comprising 3,317 patients. One study evaluated Emergency Medical Services (EMS) professionals as the ultrasound operator while five studies involved mixed practitioners and ten studies involved only physicians. Diagnostic accuracy was similar amongst physicians and mixed practitioners with no studies reporting PHUS accuracy for EMS providers alone. Seven studies evaluated treatment and transport impact of PHUS though the variables measured were inconsistent and results varied by protocol and outcomes measured. There were no studies that evaluated PHUS and its impact on patient mortality.

CONCLUSION

Ultrasound use in the prehospital setting for trauma is feasible and demonstrates potential. However, the evidence in the medical literature mainly consists of prospective observational studies of physicians utilizing ultrasound for trauma in a HEMS setting. Further scientific research must be undertaken to firmly establish the role of prehospital ultrasound in trauma management by all types of EMS providers.

Adherence to the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) 2015 Guidelines in Acute Point-of-Care Ultrasound Research

IMPORTANCE

Incomplete reporting of diagnostic accuracy research impairs assessment of risk of bias and limits generalizability. Point-of-care ultrasound has become an important diagnostic tool for acute care physicians, but studies assessing its use are of varying methodological quality.

OBJECTIVE

To assess adherence to the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) 2015 guidelines in the literature on acute care point-of-care ultrasound.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

MEDLINE was searched to identify diagnostic accuracy studies assessing point-of-care ultrasound published in critical care, emergency medicine, or anesthesia journals from 2016 to 2019. Studies were evaluated for adherence to the STARD 2015 guidelines, with the following variables analyzed: journal, country, STARD citation, STARD-adopting journal, impact factor, patient population, use of supplemental material, and body region. Data analysis was performed in November 2019.

FINDINGS

Seventy-four studies were included in this systematic review for assessment. Overall adherence to STARD was moderate, with 66% (mean [SD], 19.7 [2.9] of 30 items) of STARD items reported. Items pertaining to imaging specifications, patient population, and readers of the index test were frequently reported (>66% of studies). Items pertaining to blinding of readers to clinical data and to the index or reference standard, analysis of heterogeneity, indeterminate and missing data, and time intervals between index and reference test were either moderately (33%-66%) or infrequently (<33%) reported. Studies in STARD-adopting journals (mean [SD], 20.5 [2.9] items in adopting journals vs 18.6 [2.3] items in nonadopting journals; P = .002) and studies citing STARD (mean [SD], 21.3 [0.9] items in citing studies vs 19.5 [2.9] items in nonciting studies; P = .01) reported more items. Variation by country and journal of publication were identified. No differences in STARD adherence were identified by body region imaged (mean [SD], abdominal, 20.0 [2.5] items; head and neck, 17.8 [1.6] items; musculoskeletal, 19.2 [3.1] items; thoracic, 20.2 [2.8] items; and other or procedural, 19.8 [2.7] items; P = .29), study design (mean [SD], prospective, 19.7 [2.9] items; retrospective, 19.7 [1.8] items; P > .99), patient population (mean [SD], pediatric, 20.0 [3.1] items; adult, 20.2 [2.7] items; mixed, 17.9 [1.9] items; P = .09), use of supplementary materials (mean [SD], yes, 19.2 [3.0] items; no, 19.7 [2.8] items; P = .91), or journal impact factor (mean [SD], higher impact factor, 20.3 [3.1] items; lower impact factor, 19.1 [2.4] items; P = .08).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Overall, the literature on acute care point-of-care ultrasound showed moderate adherence to the STARD 2015 guidelines, with more complete reporting found in studies citing STARD and those published in STARD-adopting journals. This study has established a current baseline for reporting; however, future studies are required to understand barriers to complete reporting and to develop strategies to mitigate them.