Appropriateness of respiratory physiotherapy positioning for acute lobar collapse.

BACKGROUND: Positioning is an important physiotherapy treatment modality for the management of aeration loss associated with acute lobar atelectasis (ALA). Physiotherapists typically rely on lung auscultation and interpretation of chest x-ray (CXR) to inform treatment selection. These tools lack diagnostic accuracy, which could limit the ability of a physiotherapist to locate ALA and select an appropriate treatment position. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to determine the number of clinical physiotherapist treatment positions found to be in agreement with lung ultrasound (LUS)-identified aeration loss and to determine the diagnostic accuracy of CXR and lung auscultation against LUS as the reference standard for locating aeration loss in mechanically ventilated patients with ALA. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted in a tertiary teaching hospital in Sydney. Mechanically ventilated adult patients in critical care with ALA were included. Physiotherapist-selected positions were compared against location of aeration loss based on LUS results to determine appropriateness. Location of aeration loss as identified by CXR results and lung auscultation was compared against LUS as the reference standard to determine diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: Forty-three participants were included in this study. Four out of 43 patients (9.3%) were positioned appropriately. The rate of true positives for CXR and auscultation in locating aeration loss were highest in the lower lobes. Lung auscultation had higher sensitivities (16.7%-97.4%) than CXR (0%-59.5%) in a majority of lobes when detecting location of aeration loss. CXR had higher specificities (16.7%-100%) than lung auscultation (0%-64.9%) in a majority of lobes when detecting location of aeration loss. CONCLUSIONS: Physiotherapists did not deliver appropriate positioning in a majority of cases. Overall, the diagnostic accuracy of lung auscultation and CXR in detecting location of ALA was low. Correctly locating lung aeration loss is imperative to ensure appropriate respiratory physiotherapy positions are selected. Physiotherapists should consider additional assessment tools such as LUS to increase their diagnostic ability.

The use of diaphragm and lung ultrasound in acute respiratory physiotherapy practice and the impact on clinical decision-making: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Diaphragm and lung ultrasound (DLUS) is emerging as an important point-of-care respiratory assessment tool and is being used in clinical care by trained respiratory physiotherapists, both in Australia and internationally. However, the impact of DLUS on physiotherapists' clinical decision-making remains largely unknown. This systematic review aims to review the evidence for implementing DLUS in acute respiratory physiotherapy management. REVIEW METHOD USED: We conducted a systematic review. DATA SOURCES: We searched PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and Scopus from inception to 18th April 2023 for all original clinical studies reporting on the physiotherapy clinical decision-making, following a DLUS examination and/or where DLUS was used to evaluate the effect of respiratory physiotherapy, in adults over 18 years of age. REVIEW METHODS: Two authors independently performed study selection and data extraction. Individual study risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and certainty in outcomes was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations framework. RESULTS: A total of seven observational studies (n = 299) were included, all of which were in the intensive care setting. DLUS changed physiotherapy diagnosis, management, and treatment in 63.9% (50-64%), 16.8% (15-50%), and 48.4% (25-50%) of patients, respectively. There was a significant improvement in the lung ultrasound score post respiratory physiotherapy treatment (mean difference -2.31, 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI) -4.42 to -0.21; very low certainty) compared to before respiratory physiotherapy treatment. Moderate risk of bias was present in six studies, and there was variance in the DLUS methodology across included studies. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this review suggest DLUS influences physiotherapy clinical decision-making and can be used to evaluate the effects of acute respiratory physiotherapy treatment. However, the available data is limited, and further high-quality studies are needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; CRD42023418312.

Quantification of changes in lung aeration associated with physiotherapy using lung ultrasound in mechanically ventilated patients: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Lung ultrasound (LUS) is a novel and emerging tool for physiotherapists in ICU and may provide a way of monitoring lung aeration change in response to respiratory physiotherapy treatment during a patient's ICU stay. OBJECTIVE: To measure change in the LUS score associated with a respiratory physiotherapy treatment; to determine whether change in LUS score correlates with other physiological measures. DESIGN AND SETTING: A single-centre prospective cohort study was undertaken in a tertiary teaching hospital in Sydney, Australia. PATIENTS: Adult mechanically ventilated patients in ICU with suspicion of atelectasis. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome: pre-post difference in LUS score. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: PaO2/FiO2 (PF) ratio, tidal volume (VT), lung auscultation score, driving pressure (DP) and the modified radiological atelectasis score (mRAS) on CXR. RESULTS: 43 patients were included. There was a mean improvement in total LUS score after physiotherapy treatment of - 2.9 (95%CI -4.4, -1.4), and a mean improvement in LUS of the right and left lungs of - 1.6 (-2.5, -0.7) and - 1.3 (-2.5, -0.1) respectively. There was a mean improvement in PF ratio, VT and auscultation score of 10.4 (-11.89, 32.7), 19 (-7.4, 44.5) and - 1.8 (-2.6, -1.0) respectively. There was no improvement in mRAS or DP. There was a weak correlation between change in LUS score compared with change in mRAS score. LIMITATIONS: Limitations included the prospective cohort single site design and the small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: The LUS score can be used to detect changes in lung aeration associated with respiratory physiotherapy treatment for acute lobar atelectasis in mechanically ventilated patients. Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry Number: ACTRN12619000783123. CONTRIBUTION OF THE PAPER.

Interrater reliability in assigning a lung ultrasound score.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Lung ultrasound (LUS) for physiotherapists is an emerging bedside tool. The LUS score of aeration presents as a possible means of assessing and monitoring lung aeration associated with respiratory physiotherapy treatments. There are no studies to date that have assessed the interrater reliability (IRR) of physiotherapists assigning the LUS score of aeration. This study assessed the IRR of assigning the LUS score among adult, mechanically ventilated patients in an intensive care unit with a clinical suspicion of acute lobar atelectasis. METHODS: A convenience sample of patients had an LUS performed by a physiotherapist, and images were independently reviewed by two physiotherapists. Each lung zone was assigned an LUS score between 0 and 3 (with 0 being normal aeration and 3 being complete consolidation, presence of effusion, or pneumothorax). IRR was assessed using the kappa statistic. RESULTS: A total of 1032 LUS images were obtained. Assigning of the LUS across all lung zones demonstrated substantial agreement with kappa 0.685 (95% confidence interval: 0.650, 0.720). Right (0.702 [0.653, 0.751]) and left (0.670 [0.619, 0.721]) lung zones also demonstrated substantial agreement. CONCLUSION: We found substantial IRR between physiotherapists in assigning the LUS score in a mechanically ventilated adult population in the intensive care unit. AUSTRALIAN NEW ZEALAND CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12619000783123.

Thoracic ultrasound influences physiotherapist's clinical decision-making in respiratory management of critical care patients: a multicentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The potential influence of thoracic ultrasound on clinical decision-making by physiotherapists has never been studied. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of thoracic ultrasound on clinical decision-making by physiotherapists for critical care patients. METHODS: This prospective, observational multicentre study was conducted between May 2017 and November 2020 in four intensive care units in France and Australia. All hypoxemic patients consecutively admitted were enrolled. The primary outcome was the net reclassification improvement (NRI), quantifying how well the new model (physiotherapist's clinical decision-making including thoracic ultrasound) reclassifies subjects as compared with an old model (clinical assessment). Secondary outcomes were the factors associated with diagnostic concordance and physiotherapy treatment modification. RESULTS: A total of 151 patients were included in the analysis. The NRI for the modification of physiotherapist's clinical decisions was-40% (95% CI (-56 to -22%), p=0.02). Among the cases in which treatment was changed after ultrasound, 41% of changes were major (n=38). Using a multivariate analysis, the physiotherapist's confidence in their clinical diagnosis was associated with diagnostic concordance (adjusted OR=3.28 95% CI (1.30 to 8.71); p=0.014). Clinical diagnosis involving non-parenchymal conditions and clinical signs reflecting abolished lung ventilation were associated with diagnostic discordance (adjusted OR=0.06 95% CI (0.01 to 0.26), p<0.001; adjusted OR=0.26 95% CI (0.09 to 0.69), p=0.008; respectively). CONCLUSION: Thoracic ultrasound has a high impact on the clinical decision-making process by physiotherapists for critical care patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02881814; https://clinicaltrials.gov.

Barriers and facilitators to achieving competence in lung ultrasound: A survey of physiotherapists following a lung ultrasound training course.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Lung ultrasound (LUS) is an emerging tool for acute respiratory physiotherapists. In Australia, there are a select few LUS training courses run for physiotherapists. Research to date has evaluated LUS training courses for physiotherapists in terms of knowledge and skill acquisition. The impact of LUS training on user competence and confidence and whether LUS is used in clinical practice has yet to be evaluated. This study therefore explored the impact of attending a physiotherapy LUS training course on acquisition of competence and confidence and the barriers and facilitators for physiotherapists in achieving competence in LUS. METHODS: A quantitative survey containing 21 questions was distributed to 77 Australian physiotherapists. RESULTS: Of the invited physiotherapists, 39 (50%) completed the survey. Most participants were working in intensive care, in the public hospital setting. Binary logistic regression was performed and demonstrated no significant difference in the relationship between years of clinical experience and having confidence in performing or interpreting LUS images. There was also no statistical significance in the relationship between years of clinical experience and gaining competence and accreditation in LUS. Of the 39 responders, 20 physiotherapists had performed at least one LUS scan since completing training; however, most identified they never use LUS to inform clinical decision-making. Only one physiotherapist had gained accreditation through an ultrasound-governing body. The most frequently reported barriers to achieving competence were lack of clinical time to devote to training and lack of an LUS supervisor. CONCLUSION: A majority of physiotherapists who participated in an LUS training course did not attain competence or accreditation, nor were they confident in performing LUS and interpreting images. Barriers exist that prevent intensive care physiotherapists from being able to use LUS in clinical practice. LUS is also not frequently used by acute respiratory physiotherapists to make clinical decisions.

Lung ultrasound has greater accuracy than conventional respiratory assessment tools for the diagnosis of pleural effusion, lung consolidation and collapse: a systematic review.

QUESTION: In mechanically ventilated adults in intensive care, what is the accuracy of lung ultrasound (LUS) for the diagnosis of pleural effusion, lung consolidation and lung collapse when compared with chest radiograph (CXR) and lung auscultation, with computed tomography (CT) as the reference standard? DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients admitted to intensive care, with diagnostic uncertainty at enrolment regarding pleural effusion, lung consolidation and/or collapse/atelectasis. INDEX TEST: The diagnostic accuracy of LUS as the index test was estimated against CXR and/or lung auscultation as comparators, with thoracic CT scan as the reference standard. OUTCOME MEASURES: Measures of diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: Seven eligible studies were identified, five of which (with 253 participants) were included in the meta-analysis. It was found that LUS had a pooled sensitivity of 92% and 91% in the diagnosis of consolidation and pleural effusion, respectively, and pooled specificity of 92% for both pathologies. CXR had a pooled sensitivity of 53% and 42% and a pooled specificity of 78% and 81% in the diagnosis of consolidation and pleural effusion, respectively. A meta-analysis for lung auscultation was not possible, although a single study reported a sensitivity and specificity of 8% and 100%, respectively, for diagnosing consolidation, and a sensitivity and specificity of 42% and 90%, respectively, for diagnosing pleural effusion. CONCLUSION: This systematic review with meta-analysis demonstrated high sensitivity of LUS compared with CXR, with similar specificities when diagnosing pleural effusion and lung consolidation/collapse. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018095555.