Physicians' Ability to Visually Estimate Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction, Right Ventricular Enlargement, and Paradoxical Septal Motion After a 2-Day Focused Cardiac Ultrasound Training Course

A one-day focused cardiac ultrasound training has a limited impact on residents' abilities to visually assess right ventricular dimensions and function

BACKGROUND

Focused cardiac ultrasound (FCU) is a helpful tool to rapidly identify right ventricular (RV) causes of hemodynamic instability and facilitate the initiation of therapy. The clinical value of existing course models often remains unclear. This study investigated the effects of a one-day FCU training on the visual estimation skills of RV characteristics.

METHODS

Four residents were included as the study group after completing a standardized one-day FCU training. Four gender-matched controls did not take part in the training. All residents graded image quality, RV systolic function, and RV dimensions in a test comprising 35 ultrasound clips.

RESULTS

The study and control group did not differ in ICU or ultrasound experience. Overall, training participants were able to distinguish between good and insufficient image quality significantly better than the control group (agreement 80.0% vs 61.4%, p = 0.04). The agreement for the estimation of RV function and RV dimensions was not different between the groups (63.2% vs 60.5%, p = 0.66 and 64.3% vs 67.1%, p = 0.18, respectively). Descriptively, only small differences were found between the groups for the estimation of RV function and RV dimensions in subgroups of patients with normal versus reduced systolic RV function or normal versus enlarged RV dimensions, respectively. Both groups struggled in identifying RV enlargement (34.6% vs 46.2%).

DISCUSSION

In this study, a single one-day FCU training had no impact on residents' skills to visually assess systolic RV function or RV dimensions. Improvements of current training modalities or continuous teaching models are needed to optimize residency programs and patient care.

An Approach to Standard Perioperative Transthoracic Echocardiography Practice for Anesthesiologists-Perioperative Transthoracic Echocardiography Protocols

The use of intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) has become the standard of care for most cardiac surgical procedures. There are guidelines established for training, practice, and quality improvement in perioperative TEE by the joint efforts of the American Society of Echocardiography and Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists. Cardiac point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) increasingly is being incorporated into anesthesiologists' training and practice. While a special "certification in Critical Care Echocardiography" was created by the National Board of Echocardiography in 2019, there currently exist no guidelines for training, certification, and practice of perioperative TTE by anesthesiologists. In this review, the authors describe the categories, indications and applications of perioperative TTE and provide a recommended sequence for performing an examination tailored to the evaluation of perioperative patients. Although the authors describe a protocol utilized at their institution, there are no standards described in the literature for PTTE. Cardiac anesthesiologists and cardiac anesthesia societies (Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, European Association of Cardiothoracic Anesthesiologists) must come forward to establish standards working in collaboration with echocardiography societies (American Society of Echocardiography, European Society of Cardiology).

Physicians' abilities to obtain and interpret focused cardiac ultrasound images from critically ill patients after a 2-day training course

Background

This study aimed to determine whether a focused 2-day cardiac ultrasound training course could enable physicians to obtain and interpret focused cardiac ultrasound (FCU) images from critically ill patients.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the FCU images submitted by the physicians who attended a 2-day FCU training courses. Three experienced trainers reviewed the images separately. They determined whether the images were assessable and scored the images on an 8-point scale. They also decided whether the physicians provided correct responses for visual estimations of the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and right ventricle (RV) dilatation and septal motion.

Results

Among the 327 physicians, 291 obtained images that were considered assessable (89%). The scores for parasternal short-axis view were lower than those obtained for other transthoracic echocardiographic views, p < 0.001. More physicians provided incorrect appraisals of LVEF than of RV dilatation and septal motion (19.9% vs. 3.1%, p < 0.001). The percentages of incorrect answers by LVEF category were as follows: 34.8% on images of LVEF < 30, 24.7% on images of LVEF 30–54, and 16.4% on images of LVEF ≥55%, p < 0.001. A logistic regression analysis showed that patients with abnormal LVEF were associated with physicians’ incorrect assessment of LVEF, with an odds ratio of 1.923 (95% confidence interval (CI):1.071–3.456, p = 0.029).

Conclusions

A large proportion of physicians could obtain and interpret FCU images from critically ill patients after a 2-day training course. However, they still scored low on the parasternal short-axis view and were more likely to make an incorrect assessment of LVEF in patients with abnormal left ventricular systolic function.