Clinical Practices in Central Venous Catheter Mechanical Adverse Events.

Background: Over 5 million central venous catheters (CVCs) are placed annually. Pneumothorax and catheter malpositioning are common adverse events (AE) that requires attention. This study aims to evaluate local practices of mechanical complication frequency, type, and subsequent intervention(s) related to mechanical AE with an emphasis on catheter malpositioning. Methods: This is a retrospective review of CVC placements in a tertiary hospital setting from 1/2013 to 12/2013. Pneumothorax and CVC positioning were evaluated on post-insertion chest x-ray (CXR). Malposition was defined as unintended placement of the catheter in a vessel other than the intended superior vena cava on CXR. Catheter reposition was defined as radiographic evidence of a new catheter with removal of the old catheter less than 24hrs after initial placement. Data points analyzed included pneumothorax and thoracostomy rate, CVC malposition frequency, catheter reposition rate, catheter duration, and incidence of complications such as catheter associated venous thrombosis. Result: Among 2045 eligible CVC insertions, pneumothoraces occurred in 14 (0.7%; 95%CI 0.38, 1.17) and malpositions were identified in 275 (13.4%; 95% CI 12.3, 15.3). The proportion of pneumothoraces that required tube thoracostomy was 57%. The proportion of CVCs with malposition that were removed or replaced within 24h was 32.7%. "Malpositioned" catheters that were left in place by the clinical team (n = 185) had an average catheter duration of 8.2 days (95% CI 7.2, 9.3) versus 7.2 days (95% CI 6.17, 8.23) for catheters that were replaced after initial malposition (p = 0.14, t test). The incidence of venous thrombosis in repositioned "malpositioned" catheters was 7.8% versus 4.9% for "malpositioned" catheters that were left in place. Conclusions: Clinically significant catheter malposition and pneumothorax after CVC insertion are low. In this study, replaced and non-replaced "malpositioned" catheters had similar catheter duration and rates of complications, challenging the current dogma of CVC malposition practice.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Central Venous Catheter Confirmation by Bedside Ultrasound Versus Chest Radiography in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the accuracy of bedside ultrasound for confirmation of central venous catheter position and exclusion of pneumothorax compared with chest radiography. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, reference lists, conference proceedings and ClinicalTrials.gov. STUDY SELECTION: Articles and abstracts describing the diagnostic accuracy of bedside ultrasound compared with chest radiography for confirmation of central venous catheters in sufficient detail to reconstruct 2 × 2 contingency tables were reviewed. Primary outcomes included the accuracy of confirming catheter positioning and detecting a pneumothorax. Secondary outcomes included feasibility, interrater reliability, and efficiency to complete bedside ultrasound confirmation of central venous catheter position. DATA EXTRACTION: Investigators abstracted study details including research design and sonographic imaging technique to detect catheter malposition and procedure-related pneumothorax. Diagnostic accuracy measures included pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio. DATA SYNTHESIS: Fifteen studies with 1,553 central venous catheter placements were identified with a pooled sensitivity and specificity of catheter malposition by ultrasound of 0.82 (0.77-0.86) and 0.98 (0.97-0.99), respectively. The pooled positive and negative likelihood ratios of catheter malposition by ultrasound were 31.12 (14.72-65.78) and 0.25 (0.13-0.47). The sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound for pneumothorax detection was nearly 100% in the participating studies. Bedside ultrasound reduced mean central venous catheter confirmation time by 58.3 minutes. Risk of bias and clinical heterogeneity in the studies were high. CONCLUSIONS: Bedside ultrasound is faster than radiography at identifying pneumothorax after central venous catheter insertion. When a central venous catheter malposition exists, bedside ultrasound will identify four out of every five earlier than chest radiography.

Central Venous Catheterization: Are We Using Ultrasound Guidance?

OBJECTIVES: To assess the self-reported frequency of use of ultrasound guidance for central venous catheterization by emergency medicine (EM) residents, describe residents' perceptions regarding the use of ultrasound guidance, and identify barriers to the use of ultrasound guidance. METHODS: A longitudinal cross-sectional study was conducted at 5 academic institutions. A questionnaire on the use of ultrasound guidance for central venous catheterization was initially administered to EM residents in 2007. The same questionnaire was distributed again in the 5 EM residency programs in 2013. RESULTS: In 2007 and 2013, 147 and 131 residents completed questionnaires, respectively. A significant increase in the use of ultrasound guidance for central venous catheterization was reported in 2013 compared to 2007 (P< .001). In 2007, 53% (95% confidence interval, 44%-61%) of residents reported that they were initially trained in central venous catheterization using ultrasound guidance compared to 96% (95% confidence interval, 92%-99%) in 2013 (P < .0001). In 2007, more residents thought that faculty were insufficiently adopting ultrasound (42% versus 9%), and there was a lack of ultrasound teaching during residency training (14% versus 5%) compared to 2013. CONCLUSIONS: The use of self-reported ultrasound guidance for central venous catheterization significantly increased from 2007 to 2013 at academic institutions. Most residents were aware of the benefits of using ultrasound guidance. Although faculty adoption of ultrasound for central venous catheterization remains a barrier, it has decreased.

Sports medicine ultrasound (US) beyond the musculoskeletal system: use in the abdomen, solid organs, lung, heart and eye.

The use of point-of-care ultrasound (US) by non-radiologists is not new and the expansion into sports medicine practice is relatively young. US has been used extensively to evaluate the musculoskeletal system including the diagnosis of muscle, tendon and bone injuries. However, as sports medicine practitioners we are responsible for the care of the entire athlete. There are many other non-musculoskeletal applications of US in the evaluation and treatment of the athlete. This paper highlights the use of US in the athlete to diagnose pulmonary, cardiac, solid organ, intra-abdominal and eye injuries.

Rates and timing of central venous cannulation among patients with sepsis and respiratory arrest admitted by the emergency department*.

OBJECTIVES: Clinical guidelines for the acute management of emergency department patients with severe sepsis encourage the placement of central venous catheters. Data examining the timing of central venous catheter insertion among critically ill patients admitted from the emergency department are limited. We examined the hypothesis that prompt central venous catheter insertion during hospitalization among patients admitted from the emergency department acts as a surrogate marker for early aggressive care in the management of critically ill patients. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of emergency department visits using 2003-2006 discharge data from California, State Inpatient Databases, Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. SETTING: General medical or general surgical hospitals (n = 310). PATIENTS: Patient hospitalizations beginning in the emergency department with the two most common diagnoses associated with central venous catheter (sepsis and respiratory arrest). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We identified the occurrence and timing of central venous catheter using International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modifications procedure codes. The primary outcomes measured were annual central venous catheters per 1,000 hospitalizations that began in the emergency department occurring emergently (procedure day 0), urgently (procedure day 1-2), or late (procedure day 3 or later). A total of 129,288 hospital discharges had evidence of central venous catheter. In 2003, 5,759 central venous catheters were placed emergently compared with 10,469 in 2006. The rate of emergent central venous catheter/1,000 increased annually from 228 in 2003, 239 in 2004, 257 in 2005, up to 269 in 2006. Urgent and late central venous catheter rates trended down (p < 0.001). In a multilevel model, the odds of undergoing emergent central venous catheter relative to 2003 increased annually: 1.08 (95% CI, 1.03-1.12) in 2004, 1.19 (95% CI, 1.14-1.23) in 2005, and 1.28 (95% CI, 1.23-1.33) in 2006. CONCLUSIONS: Central venous catheters are inserted earlier and more frequently among critically ill patients admitted from the emergency department. Earlier central venous catheter insertion may require systematic changes to meet increasing utilization and enhanced mechanisms to measure central venous catheter outcomes.

Infection prevention in the emergency department.

Infection prevention remains a major challenge in emergency care. Acutely ill and injured patients seeking evaluation and treatment in the emergency department (ED) not only have the potential to spread communicable infectious diseases to health care personnel and other patients, but are vulnerable to acquiring new infections associated with the care they receive. This article will evaluate these risks and review the existing literature for infection prevention practices in the ED, ranging from hand hygiene, standard and transmission-based precautions, health care personnel vaccination, and environmental controls to strategies for preventing health care-associated infections. We will conclude by examining what can be done to optimize infection prevention in the ED and identify gaps in knowledge where further research is needed. Successful implementation of evidence-based practices coupled with innovation of novel approaches and technologies tailored specifically to the complex and dynamic environment of the ED are the keys to raising the standard for infection prevention and patient safety in emergency care.

Does Point-of-Care Ultrasound Affect Fluid Resuscitation Volume in Patients with Septic Shock: A Retrospective Review.

Background: Fixed, large volume resuscitation with intravenous fluids (IVFs) in septic shock can cause inadvertent hypervolemia, increased medical interventions, and death when unguided by point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS). The primary study objective was to evaluate whether total IVF volume differs for emergency department (ED) septic shock patients receiving POCUS versus no POCUS. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study from 7/1/2018 to 8/31/2021 of atraumatic adult ED patients with septic shock. We agreed upon a priori variables and defined septic shock as lactate ≥4 and hypotension (SBP <90 or MAP <65). A sample size of 300 patients would provide 85% power to detect an IVF difference of 500 milliliters between POCUS and non-POCUS cohorts. Data are reported as frequencies, median (IQR), and associations from bivariate logistic models. Results: 304 patients met criteria and 26% (78/304) underwent POCUS. Cardiac POCUS demonstrated reduced ejection fraction in 15.4% of patients. Lung ultrasound showed normal findings in 53% of patients. The POCUS vs. non-POCUS cohorts had statistically significant differences for the following variables: higher median lactate (6.7 [IQR 5.2-8.7] vs. 5.6], p = 0.003), lower systolic blood pressure (77.5 [IQR 61-86] vs. 85.0, p < 0.001), more vasopressor use (51% vs. 34%, p = 0.006), and more positive pressure ventilation (38% vs. 24%, p = 0.017). However, there were no statistically significant differences between POCUS and non-POCUS cohorts in total IVF volume ml/kg (33.02 vs. 32.1, p = 0.47), new oxygen requirement (68% vs. 59%, p = 0.16), ED death (3% vs. 4%, p = 0.15), or hospital death (31% vs. 27%, p = 0.48). There were similar distributions of lactate, total fluids, and vasopressors in patients with CHF and severe renal failure. Conclusions: Among ED patients with septic shock, POCUS was more likely to be used in sicker patients. Patients who had POCUS were given similar volume of crystalloids although these patients were more critically ill. There were no differences in new oxygen requirement or mortality in the POCUS group compared to the non-POCUS group.

Implementation of ultrasound after central venous catheter insertion: A qualitative study in early adopters.

BACKGROUND: The adoption rate of point of care ultrasound (POCUS) for the confirmation of central venous catheter (CVC) positioning and exclusion of post procedure pneumothorax is low despite advantages in workflow compared to traditional chest X-ray (CXR). To explore why, we convened focus groups to address barriers and facilitators of implementation for POCUS guided CVC confirmation and de-implementation of post-procedure CXR. METHODS: We conducted focus groups with emergency medicine and critical care providers to discuss current practices in POCUS for CVC confirmation. The semi-structured focus group interview guide was informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We performed qualitative content analysis of the resulting transcripts using a consensual qualitative research approach (NVivo software), aiming to identify priority categories that describe the barriers and facilitators of POCUS guided CVC confirmation. RESULTS: The coding dictionary of barriers and facilitators consisted of 21 codes from the focus group discussions. Our qualitative analysis revealed that 12 codes emerged spontaneously (inductively) within the focus group discussions and aligned directly to CFIR constructs. Common barriers included provider influences (e.g. knowledge and beliefs about POCUS for CVC confirmation), external network (e.g. societal guidelines, ancillary staff, and consultants), and inertia (habit or reflexive processes). Common facilitators included ultrasound protocol advantage and champions. Time and provider outcomes (cognitive offload, ownership, and independence) emerged as early barriers but late facilitators. CONCLUSION: Our qualitative analysis demonstrates real and perceived barriers against implementation of POCUS for CVC position confirmation and pneumothorax exclusion. Our findings discovered organizational and personal constructs that will inform development of multifaceted strategies toward implementation of POCUS after CVC insertion.

Adverse events related to ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia performed by Emergency Physicians: Systematic review protocol.

The use of ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia for pain management has become increasingly prevalent in Emergency Medicine, with studies noting excellent pain control while sparing opioid use. However, the use of ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia may be hampered by concern about risks for patient harm. This systematic review protocol describes our approach to evaluate the incidence of adverse events from the use of ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia by Emergency Physicians as described in the literature. This project will also seek to document the scope of ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia applications being performed in Emergency Medicine literature, and potentially serve as a framework for future systematic reviews evaluating adverse events in Emergency Medicine.

Central Venous Catheter Adverse Events Are not Associated with Crowding Indicators.

OBJECTIVE: Crowding in the emergency department (ED) impacts a number of important quality and safety metrics. We studied ED crowding measures associated with adverse events (AE) resulting from central venous catheters (CVC) inserted in the ED, as well as the relationship between crowding and the frequency of CVC insertions in an ED cohort admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational study from 2008-2010 in an academic tertiary care center. Participants undergoing CVC in the ED or admitted to an ICU were categorized by quartile based on the following: National Emergency Department Overcrowding Scale (NEDOCS); waiting room patients (WR); ED patients awaiting inpatient beds (boarders); and ED occupancy (EDO). Main outcomes were the occurrence of an AE during CVC insertion in the ED, and deferred procedures assessed by frequency of CVC insertions in ED patients admitted to the ICU. RESULTS: Of 2,284 ED patients who had a CVC inserted, 293 (13%) suffered an AE. There was no association between AEs from ED CVCs and crowding scales when comparing the highest crowding level or quartile to all other quartiles: NEDOCS (dangerous crowding [13.1%] vs other levels [13.0%], P = 0.98); number of WR patients (14.0% vs 12.7%, P = 0.81); EDO (13.0% vs 12.9%, P = 0.99); and number of boarding patients (12.0% vs 13.3%), P = 0.21). In a cohort of ED patients admitted to the ICU, there was no association between CVC placement rates in the ED and crowding scales comparing the highest vs all other quartiles: NEDOCS (dangerous crowding 16% vs all others 16%, P = 0.97); WR patients (16% vs 16%, P = 0.82), EDO (15% vs. 17%, P = 0.15); and number of boarding patients (17% vs 16%, P = 0.08). CONCLUSION: In a large, academic tertiary-care center, frequency of CVC insertion in the ED and related AEs were not associated with measures of crowding. These findings add to the evidence that the negative effects of crowding, which impact all ED patients and measures of ED performance, are less likely to impair the delivery of prioritized time-critical interventions.

Point-of-care Ultrasound-guided Central Venous Catheter Confirmation in Ultrasound Nonexperts.

OBJECTIVE: Emerging evidence suggests that chest radiography (CXR) following central venous catheter (CVC) placement is unnecessary when point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is used to confirm catheter position and exclude pneumothorax. However, few providers have adopted this practice, and it is unknown what contributing factors may play a role in this lack of adoption, such as ultrasound experience. The objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of POCUS to confirm CVC position and exclude a pneumothorax after brief education and training of nonexperts. METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study in a single academic medical center to determine the diagnostic characteristics of a POCUS-guided CVC confirmation protocol after brief training performed by POCUS nonexperts. POCUS nonexperts (emergency medicine senior residents and critical care fellows) independently performed a POCUS-guided CVC confirmation protocol after a 30-minute didactic training. The primary outcome was the diagnostic accuracy of the POCUS-guided CVC confirmation protocol for malposition and pneumothorax detection. Secondary outcomes were efficiency and feasibility of adequate image acquisition, adjudicated by POCUS experts. RESULTS: Twenty-six POCUS nonexperts collected data on 190 patients in the final analysis. There were five (2.5%) CVC malpositions and six (3%) pneumothoraxes on CXR. The positive likelihood ratios of POCUS for malposition detection and pneumothorax were 12.33 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.26 to 46.69) and 3.41 (95% CI = 0.51 to 22.76), respectively. The accuracy of POCUS for pneumothorax detection compared to CXR was 0.93 (95% CI = 0.88 to 0.96) and the sensitivity was 0.17 (95% CI = 0.00 to 0.64). The median (interquartile range) time for CVC confirmation was lower for POCUS (9 minutes [8.5-9.5 minutes]) compared to CXR (29 minutes [1-269 minutes]; Mann-Whitney U, p < 0.01). Adequate protocol image acquisition was achieved in 76% of the patients. CONCLUSION: Thirty-minute training of POCUS in nonexperts demonstrates adequate diagnostic accuracy, efficiency, and feasibility of POCUS-guided CVC position confirmation, but not exclusion of pneumothorax.

Comparison of outcomes between pulseless electrical activity by electrocardiography and pulseless myocardial activity by echocardiography in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest; secondary analysis from a large, prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: To measure prevalence of discordance between electrical activity recorded by electrocardiography (ECG) and myocardial activity visualized by echocardiography (echo) in patients presenting after cardiac arrest and to compare survival outcomes in cohorts defined by ECG and echo. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a previously published prospective study at twenty hospitals. Patients presenting after out-of-hospital arrest were included. The cardiac electrical activity was defined by ECG and contemporaneous myocardial activity was defined by bedside echo. Myocardial activity by echo was classified as myocardial asystole--the absence of myocardial movement, pulseless myocardial activity (PMA)--visible myocardial movement but no pulse, and myocardial fibrillation--visualized fibrillation. Primary outcome was the prevalence of discordance between electrical activity and myocardial activity. RESULTS: 793 patients and 1943 pauses in CPR were included. 28.6% of CPR pauses demonstrated a difference in electrical activity (ECG) and myocardial activity (echo), 5.0% with asystole (ECG) and PMA (echo), and 22.1% with PEA (ECG) and myocardial asystole (echo). Twenty-five percent of the 32 pauses in CPR with a shockable rhythm by echo demonstrated a non-shockable rhythm by ECG and were not defibrillated. Survival for patients with PMA (echo) was 29.1% (95%CI-23.9-34.9) compared to those with PEA (ECG) (21.4%, 95%CI-17.7-25.6). CONCLUSION: Patients in cardiac arrest commonly demonstrate different electrical (ECG) and myocardial activity (echo). Further research is needed to better define cardiac activity during cardiac arrest and to explore outcome between groups defined by electrical and myocardial activity.

Sex-related differences in D-dimer levels for venous thromboembolism screening.

BACKGROUND: D-dimer is generally considered positive above 0.5 mg/L irrespective of sex. However, women have been shown to be more likely to have a positive D-dimer after controlling for other factors. Thus, differences may exist between males and females for using D-dimer as a marker of venous thromboembolic (VTE) disease. We hypothesized that the accuracy of D-dimer tests may be enhanced by using appropriate cutoff values that reflect sex-related differences in D-dimer levels. METHODS: This research is a secondary analysis of a multicenter, international, prospective, observational study of adult (18+ years) patients suspected of VTE, with low-to-intermediate pretest probability based on Wells criteria ≤ 6 for pulmonary embolism (PE) and ≤ 2 for deep vein thrombosis (DVT). VTE diagnoses were based on computed tomography, ventilation perfusion scanning, or venous ultrasound. D-dimer levels were tested for statistical difference across groups stratified by sex and diagnosis. Multivariable regression was used to investigate sex as a predictor of diagnosis. Sex-specific optimal D-dimer thresholds for PE and DVT were calculated from receiver operating characteristic analyses. A Youden threshold (D-dimer level coinciding with the maximum of sensitivity plus specificity) and a cutoff corresponding to 95% sensitivity were calculated. Statistical difference for cutoffs was tested via 95% confidence intervals from 2,000 bootstrapped samples. RESULTS: We included 3,586 subjects for analysis, of whom 61% were female. Race demographics were 63% White, 27% Black/African American, and 6% Hispanic. In the suspected PE cohort, 6% were diagnosed with PE, while in the suspected DVT cohort, 11% were diagnosed with DVT. D-dimer levels were significantly higher in males than females for the PE-positive group and the DVT-negative group, but males had significantly lower D-dimer levels than females in the PE-negative group. Regression models showed male sex as a significant positive predictor of DVT diagnosis, controlling for D-dimer levels. The Youden thresholds for PE patients were 0.97 (95% CI = 0.64 to 1.79) mg/L and 1.45 (95% CI = 1.36 to 1.95) mg/L for females and males, respectively; 95% sensitivity cutoffs for this group were 0.64 (95% CI = 0.20 to 0.89) and 0.55 (95% CI = 0.29 to 1.61). For DVT, the Youden thresholds were 0.98 (95% CI = 0.84 to 1.56) mg/L for females and 1.25 (95% CI = 0.65 to 3.33) mg/L for males with 95% sensitivity cutoffs of 0.33 (95% CI = 0.2 to 0.61) and 0.32 (95% CI = 0.18 to 0.7), respectively. CONCLUSION: Differences in D-dimer levels between males and females are diagnosis specific; however, there was no significant difference in optimal cutoff values for excluding PE and DVT between the sexes.

Quantitative characterization of left ventricular function during pulseless electrical activity using echocardiography during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

BACKGROUND: Several prospective studies have demonstrated that the echocardiographic detection of any myocardial activity during PEA is strongly associated with higher rates of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). We hypothesized that PEA represents a spectrum of disease in which not only the presence of myocardial activity, but more specifically that the degree of left ventricular (LV) function would be a predictor of outcomes. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively assess the association between LV function and outcomes in patients with OHCA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using prospectively obtained data from an observational cohort of patients receiving focused echocardiography during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in the Emergency Department (ED) setting, we analyzed 312 consecutive subjects with available echocardiography images with initial rhythm of PEA. We used left ventricular systolic fractional shortening (LVFS), a unidimensional echocardiographic parameter to perform the quantification of LV function during PEA. Regression analyses were performed independently to evaluate for relationships between LVFS and a primary outcome of ROSC and secondary outcome of survival to hospital admission. We analyzed LVFS both as a continuous variable and as a categorial variable using the quartiles and the median to perform multiple different comparisons and to illustrate the relationship of LVFS and outcomes of interest. We performed survival analysis using Cox proportional hazards model to evaluate the hazard corresponding to length of resuscitation. RESULTS: We found a positive association between LVFS and the primary outcome of ROSC (OR 1.04, 95%CI 1.01-1.08), but not with the secondary outcome of survival to hospital admission (OR 1.02, 95%CI 0.96-1.08). Given that the relationship was not linear and that we observed a threshold effect in the relationship between LVFS and outcomes, we performed an analysis using quartiles of LVFS. The predicted probability of ROSC was 75% for LVFS between 23.4-96% (fourth quartile) compared to 47% for LVFS between 0-4.7% (first quartile). The hazard of not achieving ROSC was significantly greater for subjects with LVFS below the median (13.1%) compared to the subgroup with LVFS greater than 13.1% (p < 0.05), with the separation of the survival curves occurring at approximately 40 min of resuscitation duration. CONCLUSIONS: Left ventricular function measured by LVFS is positively correlated with higher probability of ROSC and may be associated with higher chances of survival in patients with PEA arrest.

Evaluation of Gender Differences in Ultrasound Milestone Evaluations During Emergency Medicine Residency Training: A Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVES: Prior literature has demonstrated incongruities among faculty evaluation of male and female residents' procedural competency during residency training. There are no known studies investigating gender differences in the assessment of procedural skills among emergency medicine (EM) residents, such as those required by ultrasound. The objective of this study was to determine if there are significant gender differences in ultrasound milestone evaluations during EM residency training. METHODS: We used a stratified, random cluster sample of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) EM residency programs to conduct a longitudinal, retrospective cohort analysis of resident ultrasound milestone evaluation data. Milestone evaluation data were collected from a total of 16 ACGME-accredited EM residency programs representing a 4-year period. We stratified milestone data by resident gender, date of evaluation, resident postgraduate year, and cohort (residents with the same starting date). RESULTS: A total of 2,554 ultrasound milestone evaluations were collected from 1,187 EM residents (750 men [62.8%] and 444 women [37.1%]) by 104 faculty members during the study period. There was no significant overall difference in mean milestone score between female and male residents [mean difference = 0.01 (95% confidence interval {CI} = -0.04 to 0.05)]. There were no significant differences between female and male residents' mean milestone scores at the first (baseline) PGY1 evaluation (mean difference = -0.04 [95% CI = -0.09 to 0.003)] or at the final evaluation during PGY3 (mean difference = 0.02 [95% CI = -0.03 to 0.06)]. CONCLUSIONS: Despite prior studies suggesting gender bias in the evaluation of procedural competency during residency training, our study indicates that there were no significant gender-related differences in the ultrasound milestone evaluations among EM residents within training programs throughout the United States.

Current Practices in Central Venous Catheter Position Confirmation by Point of Care Ultrasound: A Survey of Early Adopters.

PURPOSE: Although routine chest radiographs (CXR) to verify correct central venous catheter (CVC) position and exclude pneumothorax are commonly performed, emerging evidence suggests that this practice can be replaced by point of care ultrasound (POCUS). POCUS is advantageous over CXR because it avoids radiation while verifying correct placement and lack of pneumothorax without delay. We hypothesize that a knowledge translation gap exists in this area. We aim to describe the current clinical practice regarding POCUS alone for CVC position confirmation and pneumothorax exclusion as compared with chest radiography. METHODS: We used a modified Dillman technique to conduct a brief web-based survey to Critical Care Medicine and Emergency Medicine physicians (targeted group of early adopters) evaluating the current practice related to CVC position confirmation and PTX exclusion via CXR or POCUS. RESULTS: Of 200 post-training clinicians contacted, 136 (68%) responded to the survey. For routine CVC confirmation and PTX evaluation, 50.7% of Critical Care Medicine physicians and 65.4% of Emergency Medicine physicians reported using CXR alone while 49.3% and 33.1% respectively reported using CXR and ultrasound together. Though 84.6% of clinicians use ultrasound for CVC insertion "most of the time" or "always," none use ultrasound alone for CVC position confirmation, and only 1% has used ultrasound alone for PTX exclusion. CONCLUSIONS: Though data support its utility and advantages for POCUS as a sole modality for CVC position confirmation and PTX evaluation, POCUS is rarely used for this indication. We identified several perceived barriers toward widespread utilization suggesting areas for dissemination and implementation strategy development that will benefit patient care practices.

The diagnostic accuracy of a point-of-care ultrasound protocol for shock etiology: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of a point-of-care ultrasound exam for undifferentiated shock in patients presenting to the emergency department. METHODS: Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and research meeting abstracts were searched from 1966 to June 2018 for relevant studies. QUADAS-2 was used to assess study quality, and meta-analysis was conducted to pool performance data of individual categories of shock. RESULTS: A total of 5,097 non-duplicated studies were identified, of which 58 underwent full-text review; 4 were included for analysis. Study quality by QUADAS-2 was considered overall a low risk of bias. Pooled positive likelihood ratio values ranged from 8.25 (95% CI 3.29 to 20.69) for hypovolemic shock to 40.54 (95% CI 12.06 to 136.28) for obstructive shock. Pooled negative likelihood ratio values ranged from 0.13 (95% CI 0.04 to 0.48) for obstructive shock to 0.32 (95% CI 0.16 to 0.62) for mixed-etiology shock. CONCLUSION: The rapid ultrasound for shock and hypotension (RUSH) exam performs better when used to rule in causes of shock, rather than to definitively exclude specific etiologies. The negative likelihood ratios of the exam by subtype suggest that it most accurately rules out obstructive shock.

International, multicenter evaluation of a new D-dimer assay for the exclusion of venous thromboembolism using standard and age-adjusted cut-offs.

INTRODUCTION: We sought to determine the test characteristics of an automated INNOVANCE D-dimer assay for the exclusion of pulmonary embolism (PE) and deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in emergency department (ED) patients using standard and age-adjusted cut-offs. METHODS: Cross-sectional, international, multicenter study of consecutive patients with suspected DVT or PE in 24 centers (18 USA, 6 Europe). Evaluated patients had low or intermediate Wells PE or DVT scores. For the standard cut-off, a D-dimer result <500 ng/ml was negative. For the age adjusted cut-off, we used the formula: Age (years) ∗ 10. The diagnostic standard was imaging demonstrating PE or DVT within 3 months. We calculated test characteristics using standard methods. We also explored modifications of the age adjustment multiplier. RESULTS: We included 3837 patients and excluded 251. The mean age of patients evaluated for PE (n = 1834) was 48 ±â€¯16 years, with 676 (37%) male, and 1081 (59%) white. The mean age of evaluated for DVT (n = 1752) was 53 ±â€¯16 years, with 710 (41%) male, and 1172 (67%) white. D-dimer test characteristics for PE were: sensitivity 98.0%, specificity 55.4%, negative predictive value (NPV) 99.8%, positive predictive value (PPV) 11.4%, and for DVT were: sensitivity 92.0%, specificity 44.8%, NPV 98.8%, PPV 10.3%. Age adjustment increased specificity (59.6% [PE], 51.1% [DVT]), but increasing the age-adjustment multiplier decreased sensitivity without increasing specificity. CONCLUSIONS: INNOVANCE D-dimer is highly sensitive and can exclude PE and DVT in ED patients with low- and intermediate- pre-test probability. Age-adjustment increases specificity, without increasing false negatives.