Michael Fareri, Matthew VandeHei, Benjamin Schnapp, Corlin Jewell, Michael R Lasarev, Roxana Alexandridis, Dana Resop, Sara Damewood, Hani I Kuttab
{"title":"急诊医学住院医师对即时超声使用的评估:一项观察性研究。","authors":"Michael Fareri, Matthew VandeHei, Benjamin Schnapp, Corlin Jewell, Michael R Lasarev, Roxana Alexandridis, Dana Resop, Sara Damewood, Hani I Kuttab","doi":"10.5811/westjem.21200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is integral to emergency medicine (EM) training. It is unclear how EM residents use POCUS and how these skills are maintained as they progress in residency training. The purpose of this study was to evaluate resident use of POCUS at various timepoints in EM training.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective cohort study of EM residents at a single, three-year training program between July 1, 2014-June 30, 2022. Residents were included if they had completed three consecutive years of training and an ultrasound rotation in their postgraduate year (PGY)-1. The following time points were assessed: PGY-1 rotation and 3-, 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24-months post-rotation. Number of scans, accuracy of interpretation, acceptability for credit, and percentage of technically limited studies (TLS) were collected at each point. We analyzed performance characteristics using mixed-effects binomial logistic regression with time as a fixed effect and resident as a random effect. Models were fit separately for each performance characteristic and likelihood ratio tests were performed to determine whether performance varied over time.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 65 residents were included with a total of 13,229 exams performed during the study period. Cardiac and focused assessment with sonography in trauma examinations were performed most commonly. Overall accuracy of all exams during the examination period was 97.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 96.2-98.0%), TLS was 14.5% (95% CI 9.7-20.6%), and acceptability was 82.9% (95% CI 76.3-88.2%). Trend over time (3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months) found no differences in accuracy (P = 0.84), TLS (P = 0.20), or acceptability (P = 0.28). Further analyses by individual exam types also showed no significant differences in accuracy, acceptability, nor TLS.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Accuracy, acceptability, and percentage of technically limited scans did not significantly vary over time, suggesting that POCUS skills are maintained from PGY-1 rotation to each time point evaluated in this study.</p>","PeriodicalId":23682,"journal":{"name":"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine","volume":"26 3","pages":"478-485"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12208028/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of Point-of-Care Ultrasound Use in Emergency Medicine Residents: An Observational Study.\",\"authors\":\"Michael Fareri, Matthew VandeHei, Benjamin Schnapp, Corlin Jewell, Michael R Lasarev, Roxana Alexandridis, Dana Resop, Sara Damewood, Hani I Kuttab\",\"doi\":\"10.5811/westjem.21200\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is integral to emergency medicine (EM) training. It is unclear how EM residents use POCUS and how these skills are maintained as they progress in residency training. The purpose of this study was to evaluate resident use of POCUS at various timepoints in EM training.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective cohort study of EM residents at a single, three-year training program between July 1, 2014-June 30, 2022. Residents were included if they had completed three consecutive years of training and an ultrasound rotation in their postgraduate year (PGY)-1. The following time points were assessed: PGY-1 rotation and 3-, 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24-months post-rotation. Number of scans, accuracy of interpretation, acceptability for credit, and percentage of technically limited studies (TLS) were collected at each point. We analyzed performance characteristics using mixed-effects binomial logistic regression with time as a fixed effect and resident as a random effect. Models were fit separately for each performance characteristic and likelihood ratio tests were performed to determine whether performance varied over time.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 65 residents were included with a total of 13,229 exams performed during the study period. Cardiac and focused assessment with sonography in trauma examinations were performed most commonly. Overall accuracy of all exams during the examination period was 97.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 96.2-98.0%), TLS was 14.5% (95% CI 9.7-20.6%), and acceptability was 82.9% (95% CI 76.3-88.2%). Trend over time (3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months) found no differences in accuracy (P = 0.84), TLS (P = 0.20), or acceptability (P = 0.28). Further analyses by individual exam types also showed no significant differences in accuracy, acceptability, nor TLS.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Accuracy, acceptability, and percentage of technically limited scans did not significantly vary over time, suggesting that POCUS skills are maintained from PGY-1 rotation to each time point evaluated in this study.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23682,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine\",\"volume\":\"26 3\",\"pages\":\"478-485\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12208028/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.21200\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.21200","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
简介:点护理超声(POCUS)是不可或缺的急诊医学(EM)培训。目前尚不清楚新兴市场住院医师如何使用POCUS,以及随着住院医师培训的进展,如何保持这些技能。本研究的目的是评估住院医师在EM培训中不同时间点POCUS的使用情况。方法:这是一项回顾性队列研究,研究对象为2014年7月1日至2022年6月30日期间参加单一三年培训计划的EM住院医师。如果住院医师在研究生阶段(PGY)完成了连续三年的培训和超声轮转,则包括在内。评估以下时间点:PGY-1轮换以及轮换后3、6、12、18和24个月。在每个点收集扫描次数,解释的准确性,信用的可接受性和技术限制研究(TLS)的百分比。我们使用混合效应二项逻辑回归分析了性能特征,其中时间为固定效应,居民为随机效应。对每个性能特征分别拟合模型,并进行似然比检验以确定性能是否随时间变化。结果:研究期间共纳入65名住院医师,共进行13,229次检查。在创伤检查中,超声心动图的心脏和焦点评估是最常见的。检查期间所有检查的总体准确率为97.1%(95%置信区间[CI] 96.2-98.0%), TLS为14.5% (95% CI 9.7-20.6%),可接受度为82.9% (95% CI 76.3-88.2%)。随着时间的推移(3、6、12、18和24个月),准确度(P = 0.84)、TLS (P = 0.20)或可接受性(P = 0.28)均无差异。个别检查类型的进一步分析也显示准确性、可接受性和TLS没有显着差异。结论:准确度、可接受性和技术受限扫描的百分比随着时间的推移没有显著变化,这表明POCUS技能从PGY-1旋转到本研究评估的每个时间点都保持不变。
Evaluation of Point-of-Care Ultrasound Use in Emergency Medicine Residents: An Observational Study.
Introduction: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is integral to emergency medicine (EM) training. It is unclear how EM residents use POCUS and how these skills are maintained as they progress in residency training. The purpose of this study was to evaluate resident use of POCUS at various timepoints in EM training.
Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of EM residents at a single, three-year training program between July 1, 2014-June 30, 2022. Residents were included if they had completed three consecutive years of training and an ultrasound rotation in their postgraduate year (PGY)-1. The following time points were assessed: PGY-1 rotation and 3-, 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24-months post-rotation. Number of scans, accuracy of interpretation, acceptability for credit, and percentage of technically limited studies (TLS) were collected at each point. We analyzed performance characteristics using mixed-effects binomial logistic regression with time as a fixed effect and resident as a random effect. Models were fit separately for each performance characteristic and likelihood ratio tests were performed to determine whether performance varied over time.
Results: A total of 65 residents were included with a total of 13,229 exams performed during the study period. Cardiac and focused assessment with sonography in trauma examinations were performed most commonly. Overall accuracy of all exams during the examination period was 97.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 96.2-98.0%), TLS was 14.5% (95% CI 9.7-20.6%), and acceptability was 82.9% (95% CI 76.3-88.2%). Trend over time (3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months) found no differences in accuracy (P = 0.84), TLS (P = 0.20), or acceptability (P = 0.28). Further analyses by individual exam types also showed no significant differences in accuracy, acceptability, nor TLS.
Conclusion: Accuracy, acceptability, and percentage of technically limited scans did not significantly vary over time, suggesting that POCUS skills are maintained from PGY-1 rotation to each time point evaluated in this study.
期刊介绍:
WestJEM focuses on how the systems and delivery of emergency care affects health, health disparities, and health outcomes in communities and populations worldwide, including the impact of social conditions on the composition of patients seeking care in emergency departments.