Evaluation of an Instructional Model for Emergency Ultrasonography |
| |
Authors: | Richard Lanoix MD William E. Baker MD Joanne M. Mele MD Lekshmi Dharmarajan MD |
| |
Affiliation: | New York Medical College, Lincoln Medical and Mental Health Center, Bronx, NY, Department of Emergency Medicine;New York Medical College, Lincoln Medical and Mental Health Center, Bronx, NY, Department of Cardiology;New York Medical College, Metropolitan Hospital Center, New York, NY, Department of Radiology |
| |
Abstract: | Objective: To evaluate a 4-hour ultrasonography course in the setting of an emergency medicine (EM) training program. Methods: EM residents and faculty at a large urban center were provided a 4-hour emergency ultrasonography course. Then, during an 18-month period, a nonconsecutive sample of ultrasonographic examinations were videotaped and later reviewed. The interpretations of the emergency physician examinations were compared with the following reference standards: 1) an official ultrasound performed and interpreted by the departments of radiology or cardiology; 2) an operative report; 3) A CT scan or IV pyelogram (IVP); or 4) a cardiologist's or a radiologist's interpretation of the videotaped examinations. Results: Of 258 examinations reviewed, 28 (11%) of these were excluded because the cardiologist or radiologist reviewing the videotape determined them to be “technically limited” studies. Of the remaining 230 examinations, there were: 127 gallbladder studies [disease prevalence = 0.58; sensitivity = 0.89; specificity = 0.80; kappa (κ) = 0.69; 95% CI: 56–82%]; 39 echocardiograms to rule out pericardial effusions [disease prevalence = 0.15; sensitivity = 0.83; specificity = 0.97; κ= 0.80; 95% CI: 54–100%]; 25 abdominal ultrasounds to rule out free peritoneal fluid [disease prevalence = 0.32; sensitivity = 0.88; specificity = 0.94; κ= 0.81; 95% CI: 26–95%]; 16 renal ultrasounds to rule out hydronephrosis [disease prevalence = 0.25; sensitivity = 1.0; specificity = 0.92; κ= 0.84; 95% CI: 56–100%]; 12 pelvic ultrasounds to rule in an intrauterine pregnancy [disease prevalence = 0.67; sensitivity = 1.0; specificity = 0.75; κ= 0.80; 95% CI: 43–100%]; and 11 abdominal ultrasounds to rule out abdominal aortic aneurysms [disease prevalence = 0.09; sensitivity = 1.0; 95% CI: 2.5–91%; specificity = 1.0; 95% CI: 68–100%]. Conclusion: This 4-hour ultrasonography course has potential to serve as a foundation for an instructional model for ultrasonography training in the setting of an EM residency program. |
| |
Keywords: | ultrasonography emergency medicine instructional model diagnostic imaging |
|
|