直升机紧急医疗服务使用胸部护理点超声治疗气胸:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

Edward Griffiths
{"title":"直升机紧急医疗服务使用胸部护理点超声治疗气胸:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Edward Griffiths","doi":"10.1186/s13049-021-00977-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Auscultating for breath sounds to assess for pneumothorax in the helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) settings can be extremely challenging. Thoracic point of care ultrasound (POCUS) offers a seemingly more useful visual (rather than audible) alternative. This review critically and quantitatively evaluates the use of thoracic POCUS for pneumothorax in the HEMS setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic literature review with meta-analysis was conducted. Only papers reporting on patients undergoing POCUS for pneumothorax in the helicopter or pre-hospital setting were included. Primary outcome was accuracy, focusing on sensitivity and specificity. Secondary outcome was practicality. PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) was used to assess validity of studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twelve studies reporting on n = 1,936 images from medical and trauma patients were included in qualitative synthesis. Studies were nearly all observational designs. Most images were acquired by nurses or paramedics who were previously novices to ultrasound. The reference standard was predominantly CT. Specificity results were unanimously precise and very high, whereas sensitivity results were imprecise and extremely variable. Meta-analysis of eight studies involving n = 1,713 images yielded pooled sensitivity 61% (95% CI: 27-87%; I<sup>2</sup> = 94%) and pooled specificity 99% (95% CI: 98-100%; I<sup>2</sup> = 89%). Six studies involving n = 315 images reported practicality. The highest or second highest categorisation of image quality was reported in around half of those images.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Thoracic POCUS is highly specific but has extremely variable sensitivity for pneumothorax when performed in the HEMS setting. This is from purely a diagnostic (not clinical) perspective. Sensitivity increases when only clinically significant pneumothoraces are considered. Case reports reveal thoracic POCUS can appropriately alter treatment and triage decisions, but only for a small number of patients. It appears predominantly useful in mitigating against unnecessary interventions. More research reporting patient focused outcomes is required. In the meantime, thoracic POCUS appears to offer a more appropriate visual alternative to auscultation for breath sounds when assessing for pneumothorax in the HEMS setting.</p>","PeriodicalId":501057,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"163"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8606084/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Helicopter emergency medical services use of thoracic point of care ultrasound for pneumothorax: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Edward Griffiths\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13049-021-00977-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Auscultating for breath sounds to assess for pneumothorax in the helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) settings can be extremely challenging. Thoracic point of care ultrasound (POCUS) offers a seemingly more useful visual (rather than audible) alternative. This review critically and quantitatively evaluates the use of thoracic POCUS for pneumothorax in the HEMS setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic literature review with meta-analysis was conducted. Only papers reporting on patients undergoing POCUS for pneumothorax in the helicopter or pre-hospital setting were included. Primary outcome was accuracy, focusing on sensitivity and specificity. Secondary outcome was practicality. PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) was used to assess validity of studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twelve studies reporting on n = 1,936 images from medical and trauma patients were included in qualitative synthesis. Studies were nearly all observational designs. Most images were acquired by nurses or paramedics who were previously novices to ultrasound. The reference standard was predominantly CT. Specificity results were unanimously precise and very high, whereas sensitivity results were imprecise and extremely variable. Meta-analysis of eight studies involving n = 1,713 images yielded pooled sensitivity 61% (95% CI: 27-87%; I<sup>2</sup> = 94%) and pooled specificity 99% (95% CI: 98-100%; I<sup>2</sup> = 89%). Six studies involving n = 315 images reported practicality. The highest or second highest categorisation of image quality was reported in around half of those images.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Thoracic POCUS is highly specific but has extremely variable sensitivity for pneumothorax when performed in the HEMS setting. This is from purely a diagnostic (not clinical) perspective. Sensitivity increases when only clinically significant pneumothoraces are considered. Case reports reveal thoracic POCUS can appropriately alter treatment and triage decisions, but only for a small number of patients. It appears predominantly useful in mitigating against unnecessary interventions. More research reporting patient focused outcomes is required. In the meantime, thoracic POCUS appears to offer a more appropriate visual alternative to auscultation for breath sounds when assessing for pneumothorax in the HEMS setting.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":501057,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"163\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8606084/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13049-021-00977-0\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13049-021-00977-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在直升机紧急医疗服务(HEMS)设置听诊呼吸音来评估气胸是极具挑战性的。胸部护理点超声(POCUS)提供了一种看起来更有用的视觉(而不是听觉)选择。这篇综述批判性和定量地评估了在HEMS环境下胸腔POCUS治疗气胸的应用。方法:采用系统文献综述和荟萃分析。仅纳入了在直升机或院前环境下对气胸患者进行POCUS的论文。主要结局是准确性,重点是敏感性和特异性。次要结果是实用性。检索了PubMed、Embase和Cochrane图书馆。使用诊断准确性研究质量评估(QUADAS-2)来评估研究的有效性。结果:12项研究报告n = 1,936张来自医疗和创伤患者的图像被纳入定性综合。研究几乎都是观察性设计。大多数图像是由护士或护理人员获得的,他们以前是超声的新手。参考标准品以CT为主。特异性结果一致准确且非常高,而敏感性结果不精确且变化很大。对8项研究(n = 1,713张图像)进行meta分析,总敏感度为61% (95% CI: 27-87%;I2 = 94%),合并特异性为99% (95% CI: 98-100%;i2 = 89%)。涉及n = 315幅图像的6项研究报告了实用性。在这些图像中,大约有一半的图像质量达到了最高或第二高的分类。结论:胸腔POCUS具有高度特异性,但在HEMS环境下对气胸的敏感性变化很大。这纯粹是从诊断(而非临床)的角度来看。当仅考虑有临床意义的气胸时,敏感性增加。病例报告显示,胸椎POCUS可以适当地改变治疗和分诊决定,但仅适用于少数患者。它似乎主要用于减轻不必要的干预。需要更多的研究报告以患者为中心的结果。同时,在HEMS环境下评估气胸时,胸部POCUS似乎提供了比听诊呼吸音更合适的视觉选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Helicopter emergency medical services use of thoracic point of care ultrasound for pneumothorax: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Helicopter emergency medical services use of thoracic point of care ultrasound for pneumothorax: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Helicopter emergency medical services use of thoracic point of care ultrasound for pneumothorax: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Helicopter emergency medical services use of thoracic point of care ultrasound for pneumothorax: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Auscultating for breath sounds to assess for pneumothorax in the helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) settings can be extremely challenging. Thoracic point of care ultrasound (POCUS) offers a seemingly more useful visual (rather than audible) alternative. This review critically and quantitatively evaluates the use of thoracic POCUS for pneumothorax in the HEMS setting.

Methods: A systematic literature review with meta-analysis was conducted. Only papers reporting on patients undergoing POCUS for pneumothorax in the helicopter or pre-hospital setting were included. Primary outcome was accuracy, focusing on sensitivity and specificity. Secondary outcome was practicality. PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) was used to assess validity of studies.

Results: Twelve studies reporting on n = 1,936 images from medical and trauma patients were included in qualitative synthesis. Studies were nearly all observational designs. Most images were acquired by nurses or paramedics who were previously novices to ultrasound. The reference standard was predominantly CT. Specificity results were unanimously precise and very high, whereas sensitivity results were imprecise and extremely variable. Meta-analysis of eight studies involving n = 1,713 images yielded pooled sensitivity 61% (95% CI: 27-87%; I2 = 94%) and pooled specificity 99% (95% CI: 98-100%; I2 = 89%). Six studies involving n = 315 images reported practicality. The highest or second highest categorisation of image quality was reported in around half of those images.

Conclusion: Thoracic POCUS is highly specific but has extremely variable sensitivity for pneumothorax when performed in the HEMS setting. This is from purely a diagnostic (not clinical) perspective. Sensitivity increases when only clinically significant pneumothoraces are considered. Case reports reveal thoracic POCUS can appropriately alter treatment and triage decisions, but only for a small number of patients. It appears predominantly useful in mitigating against unnecessary interventions. More research reporting patient focused outcomes is required. In the meantime, thoracic POCUS appears to offer a more appropriate visual alternative to auscultation for breath sounds when assessing for pneumothorax in the HEMS setting.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信