Earlier point-of-care ultrasound, shorter length of stay in patients with acute flank pain

Comparison of transvaginal ultrasound utilization between radiology and point of care ultrasound in first trimester pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Transvaginal (TVUS) and transabdominal ultrasound (TAUS) are both utilized in the evaluation of early pregnancy patients. While many practitioners using point of care ultrasound (POCUS) will generally not pursue TVUS in cases where an intrauterine pregnancy (IUP) is visualized on TAUS, this may not be true in Radiology performed ultrasound.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate for differences in transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) utilization between Radiology performed (RP) ultrasound and point of care ultrasound (POCUS) by Emergency Department (ED) physicians in early pregnancy patients. Secondarily, to assess length of stay (LOS) differences and the impact of specialized emergency ultrasound training on TVUS utilization.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study at a single academic ED. Study population was all ED patients who underwent first trimester ultrasound during the one year period of March 1, 2021 to February 28, 2022. Variables evaluated were chief complaint, gestational age, LOS, TAUS and TVUS utilization, ultrasound findings, and ultrasound specialty training of the ED physician.

RESULTS

There were 133 cases of POCUS ultrasound and 254 cases of RP ultrasound. All cases had TAUS imaging performed. Median LOS for patients when POCUS was utilized was 207 min (IQR 151-294) and 258 min (IQR 208-328) for those only using RP ultrasound, p ≤ 0.001. In the POCUS cohort, 38% (95% CI 30%-46%) received TVUS, while 94% received TVUS in the RP cohort (95% CI 90%-96%), p ≤ 0.001. Patients seen by ED faculty with ultrasound specialty training had TVUS 53% of the time (95% CI 41%-65%), while those seen by other ED faculty had TVUS 79% (95% CI 74%-83%) of the time, p = 0.035.

CONCLUSION

POCUS in early pregnancy is associated with a significant reduction in TVUS usage. We suspect that POCUS users elect not to pursue TVUS after an IUP is identified on TAUS, while technicians perform protocol-based TVUS irrespective of TAUS findings. Patients seen by ultrasound trained ED physicians are less likely to receive TVUS.

Impact of emergency physician performed ultrasound in the evaluation of adult patients with acute abdominal pain: a prospective randomized bicentric trial

BACKGROUND

Abdominal pain is common in patients visiting the emergency department (ED). The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic contribution of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in patients presenting to the ED with acute abdominal pain.

METHODS

We designed an interventional randomized, controlled, open label, parallel-group, trial in two French EDs. We included adult patients presenting to the ED with acute abdominal pain. Exclusion criteria were a documented end-of-life, an immediate need of life-support therapy and pregnant or breast-feeding women. Patients were randomized in the experimental group (i.e., workup including POCUS) or control group (usual care). The primary objective of the study was to assess the added value of POCUS on diagnostic pathway in the ED, according to the diagnostic established a posteriori by an adjudication committee. The primary endpoint was the proportion of exact preliminary diagnosis between the 2 groups. The preliminary diagnosis made after clinical examination and biological results with POCUS (intervention arm) or without POCUS (usual care) was considered exact if it was similar to the adjudication committee diagnosis.

RESULTS

Between June 2021 11th and June 2022 23th, 256 patients were randomized, but five were not included in the primary analysis, leaving 125 patients in the POCUS group and 126 patients in the usual care group (130 women and 121 men, median [Q1-Q3] age: 42 [30;57]). There was no difference for exact diagnosis between the two groups (POCUS 70/125, 56% versus control 78/126 (62%), RD 1.23 [95% CI 0.74-2.04]). There was no difference in the accuracy for the diagnosis of non-specific abdominal pain nor number of biological or radiological exams. Diagnostic delays and length of stay in the ED were also similar.

CONCLUSIONS

In this trial, systematic POCUS did not improve the rate of diagnostic accuracy in unselected patients presenting to the ED with acute abdominal pain. However, as it was a safe procedure, further research should focus on patients with suspected etiologies where POCUS is particularly useful.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

 This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov on 2022/07/20 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04912206?id=NCT04912206&rank=1 ) (NCT04912206).

Point-of-Care Ultrasound-History, Current and Evolving Clinical Concepts in Emergency Medicine

Point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) has become an indispensable standard in emergency medicine. Emergency medicine ultrasound (EMUS) is the application of bedside PoCUS by the attending emergency physician to assist in the diagnosis and management of many time-sensitive health emergencies. In many ways, using PoCUS is not only the mere application of technology, but also a fusion of already existing examiner skills and technology in the context of a patient encounter. EMUS practice can be defined using distinct anatomy-based applications. The type of applications and their complexity usually depend on local needs and resources, and practice patterns can vary significantly among regions, countries, or even continents. A different approach suggests defining EMUS in categories such as resuscitative, diagnostic, procedural guidance, symptom- or sign-based, and therapeutic. Because EMUS is practiced in a constantly evolving emergency medical setting where no two patient encounters are identical, the concept of EMUS should also be practiced in a fluid, constantly adapting manner driven by the physician treating the patient. Many recent advances in ultrasound technology have received little or no attention from the EMUS community, and several important technical advances and research findings have not been translated into routine clinical practice. The authors believe that four main areas have great potential for the future growth and development of EMUS and are worth integrating: 1. In recent years, many articles have been published on novel ultrasound applications. Only a small percentage has found its way into routine use. We will discuss two important examples: trauma ultrasound that goes beyond e-FAST and EMUS lung ultrasound for suspected pulmonary embolism. 2. The more ultrasound equipment becomes financially affordable; the more ultrasound should be incorporated into the physical examination. This merging and possibly even replacement of aspects of the classical physical exam by technology will likely outperform the isolated use of stethoscope, percussion, and auscultation. 3. The knowledge of pathophysiological processes in acute illness and ultrasound findings should be merged in clinical practice. The translation of this knowledge into practical concepts will allow us to better manage many presentations, such as hypotension or the dyspnea of unclear etiology. 4. Technical innovations such as elastography; CEUS; highly sensitive color Doppler such as M-flow, vector flow, or other novel technology; artificial intelligence; cloud-based POCUS functions; and augmented reality devices such as smart glasses should become standard in emergencies over time.

Minutes matter: Time it takes to perform point-of-care ultrasound

Background

While point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) is a safe, versatile tool that can improve patient care, the perceived time investment needed to incorporate PoCUS into clinical care is cited as a barrier to performance. We sought to determine the time it takes to perform a PoCUS examination and whether this time was influenced by training level and prior ultrasound experience.

Methods

This was a retrospective study looking at time stamps of all emergency medicine (EM) provider-performed PoCUS examinations during clinical shifts from August 10, 2019, to June 7, 2022, at a suburban academic emergency department that is the site for a 3-year EM residency. Our workflow is order-based; when PoCUS is ordered, that patient's information populates the ultrasound machine worklist. Selecting the patient's name from the worklist generates a time-stamped patient information page (PIP). We defined the PIP time stamp as the start of the PoCUS examination. The duration of one PoCUS examination was defined as the time of the last image acquired minus the time of the PIP. General estimating equations were used to estimate differences between training level and between prior scan status using an exchangeable correlation and Tukey adjusted pairwise comparisons. A two-tailed chi-square analysis was used for comparing accuracy according to training level.

Results

Of 4187 PoCUS examinations abstracted, 2144 met study criteria. The median (IQR) time spent per examination was 6.0 (3-9) min. First-year residents took the longest to perform PoCUS among all providers (p < 0.0001). Residents with fewer than 250 prior scans took longer than residents with 501-800 (p = 0.0002) and >800 (p = 0.0013). Resident accuracy was not significantly different according to training level.

Conclusions

Overall median time to perform PoCUS was 6.0 min. EM residents became more efficient in performing PoCUS as they advanced from first- to third-year, without compromising accuracy.

The Impact of Prehospital Point of Care Ultrasounds on Emergency Patients Length of Stay in Thailand

Purpose

Globally, emergency departments (ED) are faced with an overcrowding problem. This issue is further compounded due to the multitude of contributing factors. Point of Care ultrasound (POCUS), especially when performed in prehospital care, that is before the patient is admitted to the ED has a high potential to reduce time of diagnosis and time of investigation which leads to shorter ED length of stay (LOS). The primary focus was on variances in ED LOS between the prehospital POCUS group and the standard care group.

Patients and Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted on prehospital patients who were admitted to the ED at Srinagarind Hospital, Thailand, from January to December 2021. We divided patients into two groups including patients who obtained prehospital POCUS (the prehospital POCUS group) and patients who received standard care treatment in which there was no prehospital POCUS performed (the standard care group). POCUS and ED medical records were documented and submitted for analysis.

Results

Of 1348 prehospital patients, 840 were enrolled in this study: 169 with prehospital POCUS and 671 with standard care. Median LOS in the prehospital POCUS group was 159 min (IQR 89,289) versus 165 (IQR 102,330) in the standard care group (p = 0.125). Further imaging diagnostic test which affected ED LOS more than four hours was lower in the prehospital POCUS group (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.92; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.729-1.666) than in the standard care group. The factor associated with increased odds of ED LOS more than four hour in the prehospital POCUS group was admission to hospital (adjusted OR 1.88; 95% CI, 1.230-2.239).

Conclusion

Patients evaluated with prehospital POCUS had a shorter LOS than the only standard care treatment without statistical significance.

The Benefits and Barriers of Using Point-of-Care Ultrasound in Primary Healthcare in the United States

An effective healthcare system should embrace practices that enhance overall quality and productivity. Training primary care physicians in Point-of-Care Ultrasound (POCUS) has become part of the processes that improve the quality of patient care and serve to guide the diagnostic impression quickly and effectively. With the purpose of highlighting the applications and challenges of POCUS use in US primary health care, we conducted a narrative review based on PubMed-indexed and Cochrane Library English text publications searched in May-July 2022 using a combination of key terms including point of care ultrasound, primary care, and US healthcare. Many studies have shown that POCUS has a positive impact on fostering medical attention and reducing morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. Besides assisting in procedures, POCUS has a head-to-toe application in evaluating inflammatory and infectious conditions, acute abdomen, cardiopulmonary function, musculoskeletal and vascular pathologies. However, its uniform implementation is limited across the US healthcare system due to multitudes of barriers such as lack of training, resource scarcity, and low reimbursement. Training primary care physicians in general and emergency care providers, in particular, is key to scaleup POCUS use. Large size studies are paramount to further explore the effectiveness of POCUS and identify key challenges to its implementation.