Does Emergency Department point-of-care ultrasound in the evaluation of possible small bowel obstruction lead to meaningful improvements in patient-centric milestones?

Yi-Ru Chen, Melva Morales Sierra, Rida Nasir, Naya Mahabir, Lisa Iyeke, Lindsay Jordan, Trupti Shah, Kevin Burke, Matthew Friedman, Daniel Dexeus, Athena Mihailos, Mark Richman, Joshua Guttman
{"title":"Does Emergency Department point-of-care ultrasound in the evaluation of possible small bowel obstruction lead to meaningful improvements in patient-centric milestones?","authors":"Yi-Ru Chen, Melva Morales Sierra, Rida Nasir, Naya Mahabir, Lisa Iyeke, Lindsay Jordan, Trupti Shah, Kevin Burke, Matthew Friedman, Daniel Dexeus, Athena Mihailos, Mark Richman, Joshua Guttman","doi":"10.1101/2024.07.01.24309689","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has 90-95% sensitivity and specificity for small bowel obstruction (SBO) compared with computed tomography (CT). ED clinicians might reasonably use a positive POCUS to progress to patient-centric milestones (eg, nasogastric tube (NGT) placement, general surgery consult, and disposition). Awaiting CT performance and interpretation before moving to such milestones may delay care. Literature is limited concerning the effects of POCUS vs. CT alone on such patient-centric milestones for patients with SBO. This study compared time to patient-centric milestones (NGT, general surgery consult, and disposition) among ED patients suspected of having SBO who underwent POCUS vs. CT only in their SBO diagnostic process. Methods: Data from 11,801 SBO patients seen among 14 EDs between 2017-2022 was queried. Patients were categorized into two groups according to diagnostic method (POCUS + CT vs. CT alone). Patients were included if they had a POCUS positive for SBO and an ED diagnosis of SBO; they were excluded from analysis of any specific/particular milestone (NGT, general surgery consult, or disposition) if they had that milestone prior to POCUS. Median time from ED arrival to each milestone was calculated for both groups (POCUS + CT vs. CT alone). Results: Compared to CT-only patients, patients with POCUS plus CT had a non-statistically-significant longer wait time from ED arrival to NGT (414 vs. 390, p=0.7) and from ED arrival to general surgery consult (487.5 vs. 442 minutes, p = 0.07). They had statistically-significantly longer time to from ED arrival to disposition (475.5 vs. 377 minutes, p=0.009). Among cases in which POCUS was performed, 80% of the time the NGT was placed, 77% of the time the general surgery consult was performed, and 100% of time disposition was made only after CT result rather than after POCUS but before CT result. Conclusion:\nUse of POCUS was not associated with earlier achievement of patient-centric milestones (NGT or general surgery consult) and was associated with longer time to disposition. This is most-likely because, despite POCUS suggesting SBO, clinicians waited for CT results prior to placing the NGT, consulting general surgery, and entering the disposition. Such results suggest that, despite POCUS's high sensitivity and specificity, ED and/or general surgery clinicians rely on CT scan results to confirm SBO, delaying patient-centric milestones.","PeriodicalId":501290,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Emergency Medicine","volume":"120 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.07.01.24309689","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has 90-95% sensitivity and specificity for small bowel obstruction (SBO) compared with computed tomography (CT). ED clinicians might reasonably use a positive POCUS to progress to patient-centric milestones (eg, nasogastric tube (NGT) placement, general surgery consult, and disposition). Awaiting CT performance and interpretation before moving to such milestones may delay care. Literature is limited concerning the effects of POCUS vs. CT alone on such patient-centric milestones for patients with SBO. This study compared time to patient-centric milestones (NGT, general surgery consult, and disposition) among ED patients suspected of having SBO who underwent POCUS vs. CT only in their SBO diagnostic process. Methods: Data from 11,801 SBO patients seen among 14 EDs between 2017-2022 was queried. Patients were categorized into two groups according to diagnostic method (POCUS + CT vs. CT alone). Patients were included if they had a POCUS positive for SBO and an ED diagnosis of SBO; they were excluded from analysis of any specific/particular milestone (NGT, general surgery consult, or disposition) if they had that milestone prior to POCUS. Median time from ED arrival to each milestone was calculated for both groups (POCUS + CT vs. CT alone). Results: Compared to CT-only patients, patients with POCUS plus CT had a non-statistically-significant longer wait time from ED arrival to NGT (414 vs. 390, p=0.7) and from ED arrival to general surgery consult (487.5 vs. 442 minutes, p = 0.07). They had statistically-significantly longer time to from ED arrival to disposition (475.5 vs. 377 minutes, p=0.009). Among cases in which POCUS was performed, 80% of the time the NGT was placed, 77% of the time the general surgery consult was performed, and 100% of time disposition was made only after CT result rather than after POCUS but before CT result. Conclusion: Use of POCUS was not associated with earlier achievement of patient-centric milestones (NGT or general surgery consult) and was associated with longer time to disposition. This is most-likely because, despite POCUS suggesting SBO, clinicians waited for CT results prior to placing the NGT, consulting general surgery, and entering the disposition. Such results suggest that, despite POCUS's high sensitivity and specificity, ED and/or general surgery clinicians rely on CT scan results to confirm SBO, delaying patient-centric milestones.
急诊科护理点超声检查在评估可能的小肠梗阻时是否能显著改善以患者为中心的里程碑?
简介:与计算机断层扫描(CT)相比,床旁超声检查(POCUS)对小肠梗阻(SBO)的敏感性和特异性高达 90-95% 。急诊室临床医生可以合理地利用 POCUS 阳性结果来推进以患者为中心的里程碑(例如,鼻胃管 (NGT) 置入、普外科会诊和处置)。在进入此类里程碑之前等待 CT 的表现和解释可能会延误治疗。有关 POCUS 与单纯 CT 对 SBO 患者以患者为中心的里程碑的影响的文献很有限。本研究比较了在 SBO 诊断过程中接受 POCUS 与仅接受 CT 的疑似 SBO 急诊患者达到以患者为中心的里程碑(NGT、普外科会诊和处置)所需的时间。方法:查询了2017-2022年间14家急诊室接诊的11801名SBO患者的数据。根据诊断方法(POCUS + CT vs. 仅 CT)将患者分为两组。如果患者的 POCUS 检查结果为 SBO 阳性,且 ED 诊断为 SBO,则纳入该组患者;如果患者在 POCUS 检查之前就有任何特定/具体的里程碑(NGT、普外科会诊或处置),则不纳入该里程碑的分析。计算了两组患者(POCUS + CT 与单用 CT)从到达急诊室到每个里程碑的中位时间。结果:与仅使用 CT 的患者相比,使用 POCUS + CT 的患者从急诊室到达到 NGT 的等待时间(414 分钟对 390 分钟,P=0.7)和从急诊室到达到普外科会诊的等待时间(487.5 分钟对 442 分钟,P=0.07)较长,但无统计学意义。从急诊室到达到处置的时间(475.5 分钟对 377 分钟,P=0.009),他们的时间明显更长。在实施了 POCUS 的病例中,80% 的病例放置了 NGT,77% 的病例进行了普外科会诊,100% 的病例在 CT 结果出来后才进行处置,而不是在 POCUS 之后、CT 结果出来之前进行处置。结论:使用 POCUS 与更早实现以患者为中心的里程碑(NGT 或普外科会诊)无关,与更长的处置时间有关。这很可能是因为,尽管 POCUS 提示有 SBO,但临床医生在放置 NGT、咨询普外科和做出处置之前仍在等待 CT 结果。这些结果表明,尽管 POCUS 具有很高的灵敏度和特异性,但急诊室和/或普外科临床医生仍依赖 CT 扫描结果来确认 SBO,从而延误了以患者为中心的里程碑。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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