Early Serial Echocardiographic and Ultrasonographic Findings in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19.

Background: Cardiac function of critically ill patients with COVID-19 generally has been reported from clinically obtained data. Echocardiographic deformation imaging can identify ventricular dysfunction missed by traditional echocardiographic assessment. Research Question: What is the prevalence of ventricular dysfunction and what are its implications for the natural history of critical COVID-19? Study Design and Methods: This is a multicenter prospective cohort of critically ill patients with COVID-19. We performed serial echocardiography and lower extremity vascular ultrasound on hospitalization days 1, 3, and 8. We defined left ventricular (LV) dysfunction as the absolute value of longitudinal strain of < 17% or left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) of < 50%. Primary clinical outcome was inpatient survival. Results: We enrolled 110 patients. Thirty-nine (35.5%) died before hospital discharge. LV dysfunction was present at admission in 38 patients (34.5%) and in 21 patients (36.2%) on day 8 (P = .59). Median baseline LVEF was 62% (interquartile range [IQR], 52%-69%), whereas median absolute value of baseline LV strain was 16% (IQR, 14%-19%). Survivors and nonsurvivors did not differ statistically significantly with respect to day 1 LV strain (17.9% vs 14.4%; P = .12) or day 1 LVEF (60.5% vs 65%; P = .06). Nonsurvivors showed worse day 1 right ventricle (RV) strain than survivors (16.3% vs 21.2%; P = .04). Interpretation: Among patients with critical COVID-19, LV and RV dysfunction is common, frequently identified only through deformation imaging, and early (day 1) RV dysfunction may be associated with clinical outcome.

Description of the Use of Incentives and Penalties for Point-of-Care Ultrasound Documentation Compliance in an Academic Emergency Department.

Objectives Incomplete documentation and submission to the electronic health record of performed point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) studies is problematic from a patient care, medicolegal, and billing standpoint. Positive and negative financial incentives may be used to motivate physicians to complete documentation workflow. The most efficacious route to improve POCUS workflow completion remains to be determined. Materials and methods A retrospective analysis of POCUS documentation in an academic emergency department during four distinct six-month blocks was performed. POCUS workflow completion was assessed without incentives (Baseline), with financial bonus (Incentive), interim period (Washout), and with a negative financial incentive (Penalty) to determine the effect of these incentives on workflow completion. Results There was an appreciable increase in the rate of POCUS studies documented between the "Baseline" (no incentive) and "Incentive" (small financial bonus) time periods. The improvement remained stable during the "Washout" (interim) period, and then increased further in the "Penalty" (negative financial incentive) period. This improvement was relatively diffuse among the providers studied. A similar pattern - improvements in the Incentive and Penalty periods with stability in the Washout - was also observed in the POCUS volume data (number of studies performed). Conclusions This study reveals a positive association between the implementation of both financial incentives and financial penalties, which increases in POCUS documentation among attending physicians at an academic emergency department.

Observational descriptive study of ultrasound use and its impact on clinical decisions in the accident and emergency department at Georgetown public hospital corporation.

INTRODUCTION: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is physician-performed at the bedside, and it is a powerful diagnostic tool, especially in resource-limited emergency medicine healthcare settings. This study aims to quantify both the use of ultrasound and its impact on patient care at the Accident and Emergency Department at the Georgetown Public Hospital Corporation (GPHC). METHODS: This is a cross-sectional observational descriptive analysis of data collected for quality assessment in the GPHC Accident and Emergency Department. Over the course of two months, physicians were asked to record each ultrasound exam performed and record whether the ultrasound results changed patient disposition or the medication used in management. RESULTS: During the study period, there were 173 ultrasound data sheets collected representing 426 ultrasound studies. 196 studies were positive with pathologic findings (46.0%). The use of ultrasound in patient care either changed the patient's final disposition or medication 78.6% of the time. CONCLUSION: Ultrasound is used frequently at the Georgetown Public Hospital Corporation for a wide variety of applications. When utilized, POCUS frequently influenced patient care.

Emergency Ultrasound Training Program in Guyana: Systematic Credentialing Process in a Resource-limited Setting.

Ultrasound has become an important skill for emergency physicians. Ultrasound is more crucial in resource-limited settings where diagnostic testing may not be as timely or available at all. In 2015, an emergency medicine ultrasound curriculum was implemented at Georgetown Public Hospital Corporation in Georgetown, Guyana. Implementing an ultrasound-training curriculum in Guyana had four main challenges: limited ultrasound equipment, lack of informational technology infrastructure to record and review ultrasound examinations, availability of local emergency ultrasound expertise, and competing educational needs within the curriculum. These challenges were met with creative solutions and the formation of a formalized curriculum and credentialing process. The experience of creating the program is described along with the curriculum, credentialing process, and plan for sustainability. Since implementation, every graduating resident has displayed competency on final assessment.

Extravasation Risk Using Ultrasound-guided Peripheral Intravenous Catheters for Computed Tomography Contrast Administration.

OBJECTIVE: Ultrasound-guided intravenous catheter (USGIV) insertion is increasingly being used for administration of intravenous (IV) contrast for computed tomography (CT) scans. The goal of this investigation was to evaluate the risk of contrast extravasation among patients receiving contrast through USGIV catheters. METHODS: A retrospective observational study of adult patients who underwent a contrast-enhanced CT scan at a tertiary care emergency department during a recent 64-month period was conducted. The unadjusted prevalence of contrast extravasation was compared between patients with an USGIV and those with a standard peripheral IV inserted without ultrasound. Then, a two-stage sampling design was used to select a subset of the population for a multivariable logistic regression model evaluating USGIVs as a risk factor for extravasation while adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: In total, 40,143 patients underwent a contrasted CT scan, including 364 (0.9%) who had contrast administered through an USGIV. Unadjusted prevalence of extravasation was 3.6% for contrast administration through USGIVs and 0.3% for standard IVs (relative risk = 13.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 7.9 to 24.6). After potential confounders were adjusted for, CT contrast administered through USGIVs was associated with extravasation (adjusted odds ratio = 8.6, 95% CI = 4.6 to 16.2). No patients required surgical management for contrast extravasation; one patient in the standard IV group was admitted for observation due to extravasation. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received contrast for a CT scan through an USGIV had a higher risk of extravasation than those who received contrast through a standard peripheral IV. Clinicians should consider this extravasation risk when weighing the risks and benefits of a contrast-enhanced CT scan in a patient with USGIV vascular access.