The technical errors of physicians learning to perform focused assessment with sonography in trauma.

OBJECTIVES: The objective was to assess the incidence of various technical errors committed by emergency physicians (EPs) learning to perform focused assessment with sonography in trauma (FAST). METHODS: This was a retrospective review of the first 75 consecutive FAST exams for each EP from April 2000 to June 2005. Exams were assessed for noninterpretable views, misinterpretation of images, poor gain, suboptimal depth, an incomplete exam, or backward image orientation. RESULTS: A total of 2,223 FAST exams done by 85 EPs were reviewed. Multiple noninterpretable views or misinterpreted images occurred in 24% of exams for those performing their first 10 exams, 3.6% for those performing their 41st to 50th exams, and 0% for those performing their 71st to 75th exams (Cochran-Armitage trend test = 10.5, p < 0.0001). A single noninterpretable view, poor gain, suboptimal depth, incomplete exam, or backward image orientation occurred in 48% of exams for those performing their first 10 exams, 17% for those performing their 41st to 50th exams, and 5% for those performing their 71st to 75th exams (Cochran-Armitage trend test = 11.6, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of specific technical errors of EPs learning to perform FAST at our institution improved with hands-on experience. Interpretive skills improved more rapidly than image acquisition skills.

Operator confidence correlates with more accurate abdominal ultrasounds by emergency medicine residents.

The purpose of this study was to assess whether greater operator confidence correlates with more accurate focused abdominal ultrasounds (FAUS) by residents. This was a prospective study of novice residents performing FAUS in patients with abdominal pain. FAUS included focused assessment with sonography for trauma, gall bladder, renal, and aortic examinations. Residents answered the question, "How confident are you of your findings?" using a visual scale from 1 (doubtful) to 5 (certain). The results of the resident-performed FAUS were compared to subsequent criterion evaluations. Thirty-eight residents with an average experience of 27 (95% confidence interval [CI] 18-36) prior US examinations evaluated 504 patients. Greater operator confidence correlated with improved accuracy of FAUS (R(2) = 0.858, p = 0.0369). Sensitivity and specificity were 14% (95% CI 4-37 %) and 71% (95% CI 48-88 %) with a confidence level of 2/5 but 85% (95% CI 73-93 %) and 100% (95% CI 97-100 %) with a confidence level of 5/5. Greater operator confidence correlates with improved accuracy in FAUS. This should be considered in the development of training guidelines.

Point-of-care urine trypsinogen testing for the diagnosis of pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess a point-of-care (POC) urine trypsinogen (UT) test for the diagnosis of pancreatitis in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of a convenience sample of patients presenting to the ED with abdominal pain or symptoms suggestive of pancreatitis. A 3-minute POC UT test (Actim Pancreatitis; Medix Biochemica, Kauniainen, Finland) was compared with plasma lipase and amylase measurements, imaging results when performed, and final discharge diagnoses. The criterion standard was a final discharge diagnosis of acute pancreatitis. RESULTS: Of 191 patients included in this study, 17 patients were diagnosed with either acute or acute-on-chronic pancreatitis. The sensitivity and specificity of UT for acute pancreatitis were, respectively, 100% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 77% to 100%) and 96% (95% CI = 92% to 98%). Seven of the 17 patients with pancreatitis (41%) had diagnostic findings on CT and positive UT tests but had nondiagnostic plasma lipase and amylase levels. CONCLUSIONS: A POC UT screening test for pancreatitis in the ED compared favorably with plasma lipase and amylase levels. Future studies should be performed to explore whether this test in the ED setting has better clinical utility than plasma lipase or amylase.

Residents should not independently perform focused abdominal sonography for trauma after 10 training examinations.

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether 10 focused abdominal sonography for trauma (FAST) examinations could be used as a minimum standard for training, as suggested previously. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of patients with abdominal trauma who underwent resident-performed FAST examinations before surgical or Department of Radiology evaluation. RESULTS: Six hundred ninety-eight patients were examined by resident-performed FAST followed by reference standard evaluations. Four hundred twelve patients were evaluated by residents who previously performed 10 FAST examinations; 154 were evaluated by 29 residents performing their 11th through 30th examinations; and 258 were evaluated by 10 residents performing their 31st and subsequent examinations. The results of resident-performed FAST for intraperitoneal free fluid were as follows: 11 to 20 examinations--sensitivity, 73.9% (95% confidence interval, 51.3%-88.9%); specificity, 98.8% (92.5%-99.9%); true-positive findings, 17; true-negative, 81; false-positive, 1; false-negative, 6; total patients, 105; 21 to 30 examinations--sensitivity, 100% (73.2%-100%); specificity, 97.1% (83.3%-99.9%); true-positive, 14; true-negative, 34; false-positive, 1; false-negative, 0; total patients, 49; 31 and more examinations--sensitivity, 94.8% (88.6%-97.9%); specificity, 98.6% (94.5%-99.8%); true-positive, 110; true-negative, 140; false-positive, 2; false-negative, 6; total patients, 258. CONCLUSIONS: The suggestion that 10 examinations could be used as a minimum standard for training in FAST examinations was not validated.

Validation of electronic student encounter logs in an emergency medicine clerkship.

Handheld electronic patient encounter logs offer opportunities to understand and enhance medical students' clinical experiences. Before using the data, the reliability of log entries needs to be verified. We assessed the sensitivity and specificity of handheld patient encounter logs by comparing documented entries with reliable external data sources. During an Emergency Medicine clerkship, medical students voluntarily recorded their patients' diagnoses in an Electronic Student Encounter Log (E-SEL) on handheld computers. We used patient demographics to match anonymous log entries with medical charts. Most students recorded 60% or more of their patient encounters and on average 60% of their patients' medical problems in the log. The false positive rate was 26% for patient encounters and 19% for patient problems. In general, students recorded more diagnoses in more detail than was available in the patient's ED chart. Improvements in the log's interface and documentation incentives should enhance the log's accuracy and utility.