Reliability of Physician Estimation of Pelvic Free Fluid Volume on the Pediatric Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 ACOUSTICS Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine Pub Date : 2025-02-13 DOI:10.1002/jum.16661
Ashkon Shaahinfar, Jennifer Rosin Wiebelhaus, Newton Addo, Ronald A Cohen, Pinar Karakas-Rothey, Aaron E Kornblith
{"title":"Reliability of Physician Estimation of Pelvic Free Fluid Volume on the Pediatric Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma.","authors":"Ashkon Shaahinfar, Jennifer Rosin Wiebelhaus, Newton Addo, Ronald A Cohen, Pinar Karakas-Rothey, Aaron E Kornblith","doi":"10.1002/jum.16661","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the reliability of physician gestalt estimation of pelvic free fluid volume on pediatric Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST). To determine a reliable cut-off volume and characteristics associated with small pelvic free fluid.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Our study assessed the ability of 2 ultrasound-trained pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) physicians and 2 pediatric radiologists to characterize pelvic free fluid in a retrospective convenience sample of archived FAST from a Level 1 pediatric trauma center, April 2018-June 2020. Inter- and intra-rater reliability were measured to determine the most reliable volume cut-off. Chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests determined characteristics associated with physiologic fluid and fluid volume.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-one (10.2%) of 797 FAST had pelvic fluid and met inclusion criteria. Volume estimates using none/trace/small versus moderate/large classifications were moderately reliable by the PEM physicians (κ = 0.65 [95% CI, 0.63-0.66]; raw agreement = 92%) and radiologists (κ = 0.48 [95% CI, 0.47-0.49]; raw agreement = 91%). This volume cut-off demonstrated higher reliability for both groups and greater agreement for PEM physicians than none/trace versus small/moderate/large. Girls (P = .005), isoechoic (P = .045), and location posterior to bladder (P < .001) were associated with physiologic fluid and hyperechoic (P = .019) with non-physiologic fluid. Hyperechoic (P < .001), anterior (P < .001), lateral (P = .04), or \"other\" location (P < .001) relative to the bladder were associated with moderate/large volume.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Ultrasound-trained PEM physicians and pediatric radiologists can reliably use gestalt estimation to distinguish moderate or large fluid from smaller pelvic fluid volumes on pediatric FAST.</p>","PeriodicalId":17563,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jum.16661","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ACOUSTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the reliability of physician gestalt estimation of pelvic free fluid volume on pediatric Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST). To determine a reliable cut-off volume and characteristics associated with small pelvic free fluid.

Methods: Our study assessed the ability of 2 ultrasound-trained pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) physicians and 2 pediatric radiologists to characterize pelvic free fluid in a retrospective convenience sample of archived FAST from a Level 1 pediatric trauma center, April 2018-June 2020. Inter- and intra-rater reliability were measured to determine the most reliable volume cut-off. Chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests determined characteristics associated with physiologic fluid and fluid volume.

Results: Eighty-one (10.2%) of 797 FAST had pelvic fluid and met inclusion criteria. Volume estimates using none/trace/small versus moderate/large classifications were moderately reliable by the PEM physicians (κ = 0.65 [95% CI, 0.63-0.66]; raw agreement = 92%) and radiologists (κ = 0.48 [95% CI, 0.47-0.49]; raw agreement = 91%). This volume cut-off demonstrated higher reliability for both groups and greater agreement for PEM physicians than none/trace versus small/moderate/large. Girls (P = .005), isoechoic (P = .045), and location posterior to bladder (P < .001) were associated with physiologic fluid and hyperechoic (P = .019) with non-physiologic fluid. Hyperechoic (P < .001), anterior (P < .001), lateral (P = .04), or "other" location (P < .001) relative to the bladder were associated with moderate/large volume.

Conclusions: Ultrasound-trained PEM physicians and pediatric radiologists can reliably use gestalt estimation to distinguish moderate or large fluid from smaller pelvic fluid volumes on pediatric FAST.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
4.30%
发文量
205
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine (JUM) is dedicated to the rapid, accurate publication of original articles dealing with all aspects of medical ultrasound, particularly its direct application to patient care but also relevant basic science, advances in instrumentation, and biological effects. The journal is an official publication of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine and publishes articles in a variety of categories, including Original Research papers, Review Articles, Pictorial Essays, Technical Innovations, Case Series, Letters to the Editor, and more, from an international bevy of countries in a continual effort to showcase and promote advances in the ultrasound community. Represented through these efforts are a wide variety of disciplines of ultrasound, including, but not limited to: -Basic Science- Breast Ultrasound- Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound- Dermatology- Echocardiography- Elastography- Emergency Medicine- Fetal Echocardiography- Gastrointestinal Ultrasound- General and Abdominal Ultrasound- Genitourinary Ultrasound- Gynecologic Ultrasound- Head and Neck Ultrasound- High Frequency Clinical and Preclinical Imaging- Interventional-Intraoperative Ultrasound- Musculoskeletal Ultrasound- Neurosonology- Obstetric Ultrasound- Ophthalmologic Ultrasound- Pediatric Ultrasound- Point-of-Care Ultrasound- Public Policy- Superficial Structures- Therapeutic Ultrasound- Ultrasound Education- Ultrasound in Global Health- Urologic Ultrasound- Vascular Ultrasound
期刊最新文献
Differences in the Sonographic Features of Adenomyosis and Concurrent Endometriosis Compared to Isolated Adenomyosis: A MUSA Criteria Analysis. Advancing Osteoporosis Assessment Through a Numerical Study Utilizing Ultrasonic Waves in Femur Bone Evaluation. Diagnosis of Thyroid Nodule Malignancy Using Peritumoral Region and Artificial Intelligence: Results of Hand-Crafted, Deep Radiomics Features and Radiologists' Assessment in Multicenter Cohorts. Prenatal Diagnosis and Classification of Type I Persistent Left Superior Vena Cava. Reliability of Physician Estimation of Pelvic Free Fluid Volume on the Pediatric Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1