Rapid Ultrasonography for Shock and Hypotension Protocol Performed using Handheld Ultrasound Devices by Paramedics in a Moving Ambulance: Evaluation of Image Accuracy and Time in Motion.

INTRODUCTION: Handheld ultrasound (US) devices have become increasingly popular since the early 2000s due to their portability and affordability compared to conventional devices. The Rapid Ultrasonography for Shock and Hypotension (RUSH) protocol, introduced in 2009, has shown promising accuracy rates when performed with handheld devices. However, there are limited data on the accuracy of such examinations performed in a moving ambulance. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and accuracy of the RUSH protocol performed by paramedics using handheld US devices in a moving ambulance. OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to examine the performability of the RUSH protocol with handheld US devices in a moving ambulance and to evaluate the accuracy of diagnostic views obtained within an appropriate time frame. METHODS: A prospective study was conducted with paramedics who underwent theoretical and practical training in the RUSH protocol. The participants performed the protocol using a handheld US device in both stationary and moving ambulances. Various cardiac and abdominal views were obtained and evaluated for accuracy. The duration of the protocol performance was recorded for each participant. RESULTS: Nine paramedics completed the study, with 18 performances each in both stationary and moving ambulance groups. The accuracy of diagnostic views obtained during the RUSH protocol did not significantly differ between the stationary and moving groups. However, the duration of protocol performance was significantly shorter in the moving group compared to the stationary group. CONCLUSION: Paramedics demonstrated the ability to perform the RUSH protocol effectively using handheld US devices in both stationary and moving ambulances following standard theoretical and practical training. The findings suggest that ambulance movement does not significantly affect the accuracy of diagnostic views obtained during the protocol. Further studies with larger sample sizes are warranted to validate these findings and explore the potential benefits of prehospital US in dynamic environments.

A Simulation Model for the Handheld Ultrasound Diagnosis of Pediatric Forearm Fractures.

INTRODUCTION: Handheld ultrasound (HHU) devices have gained prominence in emergency care settings and post-graduate training, but their application in the diagnosis of pediatric fractures remains under-explored. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and accuracy of an HHU device for diagnosing pediatric forearm fractures using a simulation model. METHODS: The materials for the basic pediatric fracture model include turkey bones soaked in white vinegar to make them pliable, food-grade gelatine, and plastic containers. Ultrasound analysis of the models was done with an HHU device, Sonosite IViz US (FUJIFILM Sonosite, Inc.; Bothell, Washington USA). Four different fracture patterns (transverse fracture, oblique fracture, greenstick fracture, and a torus fracture) and one model without fracture were used in this study. Twenty-six Emergency Medicine residents sonographically evaluated different bone models in order to define the presence and absence of fracture and the fracture subtype. The participants' ability to obtain adequate images and the time taken to create and recognize the images were evaluated and recorded. After the sonographic examination, the residents were also asked for their opinion on the model as a teaching tool. RESULTS: All participants (100%) recognized the normal bone model and the fracture, regardless of the fracture type. The consistency analysis between the practitioners indicated a substantial agreement (weighted kappa value of 0.707). The duration to identify the target pathology in fracture models was significantly longer for the greenstick fracture (78.57 [SD = 30.45] seconds) model compared to other models. The majority of participants (92.3%) agreed that the model used would be a useful teaching tool for learning ultrasound diagnosis of pediatric forearm fractures. CONCLUSIONS: All participants successfully identified both the normal bone model and the presence of fractures, irrespective of the fracture type. Significantly, the identification of the greenstick fracture took longer compared to other fracture types. Moreover, the majority of participants acknowledged the model's utility as a teaching tool for learning ultrasound diagnosis of pediatric forearm fractures.

The efficiency of bedside ultrasonography in patients with wrist injury and comparison with other radiological imaging methods: A prospective study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to determine the efficiency of ultrasound (US) scanning in patients with wrist trauma admitted to the emergency department and to compare US diagnostic usage with other radiological imaging methods. METHODS: Patients who presented to the emergency department with wrist injury and who met the inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria were eligible. For all patients, US evaluation of the whole wrist was performed by an emergency physician before other radiological imaging methods (radiographies, computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging). All of the patients included in the study underwent US, radiography, CT, and MR. RESULTS: During the study, 122 patients were admitted with a wrist injury. After filtering for the exclusion criteria, 80 patients were included in the study. The sensitivity of US scanning in detecting fractures was 95.31% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 87.1-98.39), the specificity was 93.75% (95% CI: 71.67-98.89), and the positive predictive value was 98.39% (95% CI: 91.72-99.85), and the negative predictive value was 83.33% (95% CI: 72.98-90.41). The sensitivity of US scanning in detecting tendon and ligamentous structural injury was 66.67% (95% CI: 41.71-84.82), the specificity was 100% (95% CI: 94.42-100), the positive predictive value was 100% (95% CI: 94.29-99.89), and the negative predictive was 92.86% (95% CI: 84.25-97.14). CONCLUSION: US scanning is an effective method that can be applied in the emergency department to adult patients to diagnose distal forearm and carpal bones fractures. In soft tissue injuries, US and MR examinations produce similar results.

The effectiveness of BD Vacutainer® Plus Urinalysis Preservative Tubes in preservation of urine for chemical strip analysis and particle counting.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the stability of urine collected in preservative tubes for chemistry strip analyses and particle counting to determine whether the transport of urine samples with all of their constituents is possible. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 275 pathologic urine specimens were included. Each urine sample was evaluated after 4, 8, 12, 24, and 48 hours of storage in BD Vacutainer(®) Plus Urinalysis Preservative (BD UAP) tubes and compared with refrigeration at 4 °C. All analyses were peformed on H-800 and FUS-200 automatic modular urine analyzers (Dirui Industry, Changchun, China). The kappa coefficients (κ), false positive (FP) and false negative (FN) rates were evaluated. κ > 0.8 was accepted as good agreement. RESULTS: Haemoglobin (Hb), leucocyte esterase (LE), and protein (Pro) analyses should be performed within 4 hours, whereas glucose (Glc) was stable until the end of 48 hours in both storage conditions. Nitrite (Nit) was well preserved in BD UAP tubes for 24 hours but was stable only up to 8 hours at 4 °C. Bilirubin (Bil) had very high FN rates even at 4 hours in both conditions. The particle counting showed high FN rates for white blood cells (WBC) and red blood cells (RBC), whereas squamous epithelial cells (EC) were stable up to 8 hours in both conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Preanalytical requirements for both urine chemical strip analyses and particle counting in a unique sample were not met in either condition. Thus, the transfer of urine samples for centralization of urinalysis is not yet feasible.