Effectiveness of a Perioperative Transthoracic Ultrasound Training Program for Students and Residents.

OBJECTIVE: Focused ultrasound (US) is being incorporated across all levels of medical education. Although many comprehensive US courses exist, their scope is broad, requiring expert instructors, access to simulation, and extensive time commitment by the learner. We aim to compare learning across levels of training and specialties using a goal-directed, web-based course without live skills training. DESIGN: A prospective observational study of students and residents from medicine, surgery, and anesthesiology. Analysis compared pretests and posttests assessing 3 competencies. Individual mean score improvement (MSI) was compared by paired-sample t-tests and MSI among cohorts by analysis of variance, with significance set at p ≤ 0.05. McNemar test compared those who agreed or strongly agreed with survey items with those who did not before and after intervention. SETTING: Jackson Memorial Hospital, Miami, FL residency training programs in Medicine, Surgery, and Anesthesiology. RESULTS: A total of 180 trainees participated. A significant MSI was noted in each of 3 competencies in all 3 cohorts. Students' (S) MSI was significantly higher than residents' (R) and interns' (I) in US "knobology" and window recognition [S = 2.28 ± 1.29/5 vs R = 1.63 ± 1.21/5 (p = 0.014); vs I = 1.59 ± 1.12/5 (p = 0.032)]; students' total score MSI was significantly higher than residents [7.60 ± 3.43/20 vs 5.78 ± 3.08/20 (p < 0.008)]. All cohorts reported improved comfort in using transthoracic US and improved ability to recognize indications for use. More than 81% of all participants reported improved confidence in performing transthoracic US; more than 91% reported interest in additional training; and more than 88% believed course length was appropriate. CONCLUSIONS: Learners across levels of medical training and specialties can benefit from a brief, goal-directed, web-based training with early incorporation producing maximal yield.

AME evidence series 001-The Society for Translational Medicine: clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis and early identification of sepsis in the hospital.

Sepsis is a heterogeneous disease caused by an infection stimulus that triggers several complex local and systemic immuno-inflammatory reactions, which results in multiple organ dysfunction and significant morbidity and mortality. The diagnosis of sepsis is challenging because there is no gold standard for diagnosis. As a result, the clinical diagnosis of sepsis is ever changing to meet the clinical and research requirements. Moreover, although there are many novel biomarkers and screening tools for predicting the risk of sepsis, the diagnostic performance and effectiveness of these measures are less than satisfactory, and there is insufficient evidence to recommend clinical use of these new techniques. As a consequence, diagnostic criteria for sepsis need regular revision to cope with emerging evidence. This review aims to present the most updated information on diagnosis and early recognition of sepsis. Recommendations for clinical use of different diagnostic tools rely on the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Because most of the studies were observational and did not allow a reliable assessment of these tools, a two-step inference approach was employed. Future trials need to confirm or refute a particular index test and should directly explore relevant patient outcome parameters.

AME evidence series 001: The Society for Translational Medicine: clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis and early identification of sepsis in the hospital

: Sepsis is a heterogeneous disease caused by an infection stimulus that triggers several complex local and systemic immuno-inflammatory reactions, which results in multiple organ dysfunction and significant morbidity and mortality. The diagnosis of sepsis is challenging because there is no gold standard for diagnosis. As a result, the clinical diagnosis of sepsis is ever changing to meet the clinical and research requirements. Moreover, although there are many novel biomarkers and screening tools for predicting the risk of sepsis, the diagnostic performance and effectiveness of these measures are less than satisfactory, and there is insufficient evidence to recommend clinical use of these new techniques. As a consequence, diagnostic criteria for sepsis need regular revision to cope with emerging evidence. This review aims to present the most updated information on diagnosis and early recognition of sepsis.