Evaluation of Point-of-Care Ultrasound in a Helicopter Emergency Medical Service Program

Q3 Nursing
Mason A. Hill BS, Jarett D. Jones BS, Matthew VandeHei MD, Justin Purnell MD, Nikolai Schnittke MD, PhD, Sara Damewood MD, Hani I. Kuttab MD
{"title":"Evaluation of Point-of-Care Ultrasound in a Helicopter Emergency Medical Service Program","authors":"Mason A. Hill BS,&nbsp;Jarett D. Jones BS,&nbsp;Matthew VandeHei MD,&nbsp;Justin Purnell MD,&nbsp;Nikolai Schnittke MD, PhD,&nbsp;Sara Damewood MD,&nbsp;Hani I. Kuttab MD","doi":"10.1016/j.amj.2024.05.016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in the prehospital setting has rapidly expanded, including helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS). A more robust understanding of the use of prehospital POCUS and its impact on patient management is needed. The purpose of this study is to: 1) evaluate the applications of prehospital POCUS examinations, 2) assess physician accuracy in interpretation and the acceptability of the quality of performed exams, and 3) evaluate self-reported alterations in patient management.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This is a single-center, retrospective, observational cohort study of adult patients aged &gt;18 years transported via HEMS from March 1, 2018 to April 7, 2023, at a single academic medical center. Exclusion criteria were: patients aged &lt;18 years of age and of vulnerable populations (e.g., prisoners, pregnant women), studies with missing data (e.g., medical record numbers), and studies which were not submitted for quality assurance. All flight physicians were trained in prehospital POCUS and required to complete a standardized worksheet following the completion of each examination. Images and worksheets were reviewed weekly and assigned a score for interpretation (e.g., true positive) and whether the exam was acceptable for quality (e.g., yes/no). A second blinded reviewer interpreted all studies. An agreement analysis (Cohen's kappa) was calculated for each variable. McNemar testing was used to assess differences in the distribution of binary measures. Demographic information was obtained for each study participant.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In total, 242 patients received POCUS for a total of 364 examinations by 26 unique users. Focused cardiac (40.4%) and thoracic (32.4%) exams were most commonly performed. Overall accuracy and acceptability for all exams performed were 97.6% and 96.1%, respectively. The accuracy of interpretation between raters demonstrated high agreement (89.2%; K=0.81, 95% CI 0.74-0.88). Acceptability of image quality was also high between raters (95.0%; K=0.38, 95% CI 0.10-0.65) without significant disagreement (p=0.25). Users self-reported alterations in patient management in 75.6% of cases (n=183), most commonly by improving diagnostic certainty (n=131, 71.6%) and altering medical management (n=62, 33.9%).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Focused cardiac and thoracic examinations were the most commonly performed POCUS examinations. Prehospital POCUS can be performed accurately by flight physicians with acceptable image quality. Users frequently reported improved diagnostic accuracy when utilizing prehospital POCUS.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":35737,"journal":{"name":"Air Medical Journal","volume":"43 4","pages":"Page 365"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Air Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1067991X24001135","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in the prehospital setting has rapidly expanded, including helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS). A more robust understanding of the use of prehospital POCUS and its impact on patient management is needed. The purpose of this study is to: 1) evaluate the applications of prehospital POCUS examinations, 2) assess physician accuracy in interpretation and the acceptability of the quality of performed exams, and 3) evaluate self-reported alterations in patient management.

Methods

This is a single-center, retrospective, observational cohort study of adult patients aged >18 years transported via HEMS from March 1, 2018 to April 7, 2023, at a single academic medical center. Exclusion criteria were: patients aged <18 years of age and of vulnerable populations (e.g., prisoners, pregnant women), studies with missing data (e.g., medical record numbers), and studies which were not submitted for quality assurance. All flight physicians were trained in prehospital POCUS and required to complete a standardized worksheet following the completion of each examination. Images and worksheets were reviewed weekly and assigned a score for interpretation (e.g., true positive) and whether the exam was acceptable for quality (e.g., yes/no). A second blinded reviewer interpreted all studies. An agreement analysis (Cohen's kappa) was calculated for each variable. McNemar testing was used to assess differences in the distribution of binary measures. Demographic information was obtained for each study participant.

Results

In total, 242 patients received POCUS for a total of 364 examinations by 26 unique users. Focused cardiac (40.4%) and thoracic (32.4%) exams were most commonly performed. Overall accuracy and acceptability for all exams performed were 97.6% and 96.1%, respectively. The accuracy of interpretation between raters demonstrated high agreement (89.2%; K=0.81, 95% CI 0.74-0.88). Acceptability of image quality was also high between raters (95.0%; K=0.38, 95% CI 0.10-0.65) without significant disagreement (p=0.25). Users self-reported alterations in patient management in 75.6% of cases (n=183), most commonly by improving diagnostic certainty (n=131, 71.6%) and altering medical management (n=62, 33.9%).

Conclusion

Focused cardiac and thoracic examinations were the most commonly performed POCUS examinations. Prehospital POCUS can be performed accurately by flight physicians with acceptable image quality. Users frequently reported improved diagnostic accuracy when utilizing prehospital POCUS.

直升机紧急医疗服务项目中的护理点超声波评估
院前超声检查(POCUS)的应用范围迅速扩大,包括直升机急救医疗服务(HEMS)。我们需要更深入地了解院前 POCUS 的使用及其对患者管理的影响。本研究的目的是方法这是一项单中心、回顾性、观察性队列研究,研究对象为 2018 年 3 月 1 日至 2023 年 4 月 7 日期间在一家学术医疗中心通过 HEMS 转运的年龄为 >18 岁的成年患者。排除标准为:年龄在<18岁的患者和弱势人群(如囚犯、孕妇)、数据缺失(如病历号)的研究以及未提交质量保证的研究。所有飞行医师均接受过院前 POCUS 培训,并要求在完成每次检查后填写一份标准化工作表。每周都会对图像和工作表进行审核,并对解释(如真阳性)和检查质量是否合格(如是/否)进行评分。第二位盲审阅者负责解释所有研究。对每个变量都计算了一致性分析(科恩卡帕)。McNemar 检验用于评估二元变量分布的差异。结果共有 242 名患者接受了 POCUS 检查,26 名使用者共进行了 364 次检查。重点检查心脏(40.4%)和胸部(32.4%)最常见。所有检查的总体准确率和可接受性分别为 97.6% 和 96.1%。评分者之间的判读准确性显示出很高的一致性(89.2%;K=0.81,95% CI 0.74-0.88)。评分者之间对图像质量的可接受性也很高(95.0%;K=0.38,95% CI 0.10-0.65),无明显分歧(P=0.25)。在 75.6% 的病例(人数=183)中,用户自我报告改变了对患者的管理,最常见的是提高了诊断的确定性(人数=131,71.6%)和改变了医疗管理(人数=62,33.9%)。院前 POCUS 可由飞行医师准确执行,且图像质量可接受。用户经常报告使用院前 POCUS 提高了诊断准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Air Medical Journal
Air Medical Journal Nursing-Emergency Nursing
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
112
审稿时长
69 days
期刊介绍: Air Medical Journal is the official journal of the five leading air medical transport associations in the United States. AMJ is the premier provider of information for the medical transport industry, addressing the unique concerns of medical transport physicians, nurses, pilots, paramedics, emergency medical technicians, communication specialists, and program administrators. The journal contains practical how-to articles, debates on controversial industry issues, legislative updates, case studies, and peer-reviewed original research articles covering all aspects of the medical transport profession.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信