{"title":"急性胸综合征。","authors":"Patrick Meloy, Daniel R Rutz, Amit Bhambri","doi":"10.21980/J80S8J","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Audience: </strong>Emergency medicine residents and medical students on emergency medicine rotations.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Acute chest syndrome is a life-threatening, potentially catastrophic complication of sickle cell disease.1,2 It occurs in approximately 50% of patients with sickle cell disease, with up to 13% all-cause mortality.1 Most common in children aged 2-4, up to 80% of patients with a prior diagnosis of acute chest syndrome will have recurrence of this syndrome.4 Diagnostic criteria include a new infiltrate on pulmonary imaging combined with any of the following: fever > 38.5°C (101.3°F), cough, wheezing, hypoxemia (PaO2 < 60 mm Hg), tachypnea, or chest pain.4,5 The pathophysiology of acute chest syndrome involves vaso-occlusion in pulmonary vessels resulting in hypoxia, release of inflammatory mediators, acidosis, and infarction of lung tissue. The most common precipitants are infections (viral or bacterial), rib infarction, and fat emboli.1,2,4 Patients commonly present with fever, dyspnea, cough, chills, chest pain, or hemoptysis. Diagnosis is made through physical exam, blood work, and chest imaging.1,2 Chest radiograph is considered the gold standard for imaging modality.3 Management of acute chest syndrome includes hydration with IV crystalloid solutions, antibiotics, judicious analgesia, oxygen, and, in severe cases, transfusion.6 Emergency medicine practitioners should keep acute chest syndrome as a cannot miss, high consequence differential diagnosis for all patients with sickle cell disease presenting to the Emergency Department.</p><p><strong>Educational objectives: </strong>At the end of this oral board session, examinees will: 1) demonstrate the ability to obtain a complete medical history; 2) demonstrate the ability to perform a detailed physical examination in a patient with respiratory distress; 3) identify a patient with respiratory distress and hypoxia and manage appropriately (administer oxygen, place patient on monitor); 4) investigate the broad differential diagnoses which include acute chest syndrome, pneumonia, acute coronary syndrome, acute congestive heart failure, acute aortic dissection and acute pulmonary embolism; 5) list the appropriate laboratory and imaging studies to differentiate acute chest syndrome from other diagnoses (complete blood count, comprehensive metabolic panel, brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), lactic acid, procalcitonin, EKG, troponin level, d-dimer, chest radiograph); 6) identify a patient with acute chest syndrome and manage appropriately (administer intravenous pain medications, administer antibiotics after obtaining blood cultures, emergent consultation with hematology) and 7) provide appropriate disposition to the intensive care unit after consultation with hematology.</p><p><strong>Educational methods: </strong>This case is used as a method to assess learners' ability to rapidly assess a patient in respiratory distress. The learner needs to address a limited differential diagnosis list while simultaneously stabilizing and treating the patient. The \"patient\" becomes an active participant in the case, with repeated requests for pain medication, and appropriate analgesic administration is required as a critical action. For faculty, this case is used to assist with periodic assessment of resident performance while in the emergency department (ED).We use oral board testing as one additional tool to assess residents' critical thinking, while still applying the pressure that is needed to pass the oral certification examination. Large groups of residents can be assessed in short periods of time without needing to \"wait\" for this particular patient presentation to be seen in the ED.In this case, learners were assessed using a free online evaluation tool, Google forms. Multiple questions were written for each critical action, and the Google form served as the online evaluation and repository of this information. The critical actions of the case were then tied to Emergency Medicine Milestones, and the results were compiled for use during resident clinical competency evaluations. Residents were provided with immediate feedback of their performance and were also given their electronic evaluations when requested.</p><p><strong>Research methods: </strong>To assess the strengths and weaknesses of the case, learners and instructors were given the opportunity to provide electronic feedback after the case was completed. Subsequent modifications were made based on the feedback provided. Additionally, learners answered written multiple-choice questions after the case to assess for retention of the material.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Senior and junior residents alike enjoyed the process of an oral board simulation as an alternative to a more formal lecture. Seniors also stated that they felt more confident with their ability to pass the oral certification examination after having gone through oral board testing while in residency. Overall, the case was rated relatively highly, with residents scoring the case as 4.3 ± 0.186, 95% confidence interval (1-5 Likert scale, 5 being excellent, n=53) after their assessment was completed.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Students and residents who participated in the oral board exam formatting found this to be preferable to a traditional lecture and enjoyed the learning environment. Faculty also found this type of participation to be more engaging and were pleased with the ability to perform high-stress assessments with low stakes. The content contained in the case is relevant to all emergency medicine trainees, and this formatting forces the learner to be an active participant in the learning session. The case is a good model for the high-stakes testing of the oral certification exam and is an effective way to test a resident's ability to rapidly assess and manage a life-threatening condition in the ED.</p><p><strong>Topics: </strong>Sickle cell anemia, vaso-occlusive pain crisis, acute chest syndrome, hypoxia, pneumonia, sepsis.</p>","PeriodicalId":73721,"journal":{"name":"Journal of education & teaching in emergency medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10332774/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Acute Chest Syndrome.\",\"authors\":\"Patrick Meloy, Daniel R Rutz, Amit Bhambri\",\"doi\":\"10.21980/J80S8J\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Audience: </strong>Emergency medicine residents and medical students on emergency medicine rotations.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Acute chest syndrome is a life-threatening, potentially catastrophic complication of sickle cell disease.1,2 It occurs in approximately 50% of patients with sickle cell disease, with up to 13% all-cause mortality.1 Most common in children aged 2-4, up to 80% of patients with a prior diagnosis of acute chest syndrome will have recurrence of this syndrome.4 Diagnostic criteria include a new infiltrate on pulmonary imaging combined with any of the following: fever > 38.5°C (101.3°F), cough, wheezing, hypoxemia (PaO2 < 60 mm Hg), tachypnea, or chest pain.4,5 The pathophysiology of acute chest syndrome involves vaso-occlusion in pulmonary vessels resulting in hypoxia, release of inflammatory mediators, acidosis, and infarction of lung tissue. The most common precipitants are infections (viral or bacterial), rib infarction, and fat emboli.1,2,4 Patients commonly present with fever, dyspnea, cough, chills, chest pain, or hemoptysis. Diagnosis is made through physical exam, blood work, and chest imaging.1,2 Chest radiograph is considered the gold standard for imaging modality.3 Management of acute chest syndrome includes hydration with IV crystalloid solutions, antibiotics, judicious analgesia, oxygen, and, in severe cases, transfusion.6 Emergency medicine practitioners should keep acute chest syndrome as a cannot miss, high consequence differential diagnosis for all patients with sickle cell disease presenting to the Emergency Department.</p><p><strong>Educational objectives: </strong>At the end of this oral board session, examinees will: 1) demonstrate the ability to obtain a complete medical history; 2) demonstrate the ability to perform a detailed physical examination in a patient with respiratory distress; 3) identify a patient with respiratory distress and hypoxia and manage appropriately (administer oxygen, place patient on monitor); 4) investigate the broad differential diagnoses which include acute chest syndrome, pneumonia, acute coronary syndrome, acute congestive heart failure, acute aortic dissection and acute pulmonary embolism; 5) list the appropriate laboratory and imaging studies to differentiate acute chest syndrome from other diagnoses (complete blood count, comprehensive metabolic panel, brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), lactic acid, procalcitonin, EKG, troponin level, d-dimer, chest radiograph); 6) identify a patient with acute chest syndrome and manage appropriately (administer intravenous pain medications, administer antibiotics after obtaining blood cultures, emergent consultation with hematology) and 7) provide appropriate disposition to the intensive care unit after consultation with hematology.</p><p><strong>Educational methods: </strong>This case is used as a method to assess learners' ability to rapidly assess a patient in respiratory distress. The learner needs to address a limited differential diagnosis list while simultaneously stabilizing and treating the patient. The \\\"patient\\\" becomes an active participant in the case, with repeated requests for pain medication, and appropriate analgesic administration is required as a critical action. For faculty, this case is used to assist with periodic assessment of resident performance while in the emergency department (ED).We use oral board testing as one additional tool to assess residents' critical thinking, while still applying the pressure that is needed to pass the oral certification examination. Large groups of residents can be assessed in short periods of time without needing to \\\"wait\\\" for this particular patient presentation to be seen in the ED.In this case, learners were assessed using a free online evaluation tool, Google forms. Multiple questions were written for each critical action, and the Google form served as the online evaluation and repository of this information. The critical actions of the case were then tied to Emergency Medicine Milestones, and the results were compiled for use during resident clinical competency evaluations. Residents were provided with immediate feedback of their performance and were also given their electronic evaluations when requested.</p><p><strong>Research methods: </strong>To assess the strengths and weaknesses of the case, learners and instructors were given the opportunity to provide electronic feedback after the case was completed. Subsequent modifications were made based on the feedback provided. Additionally, learners answered written multiple-choice questions after the case to assess for retention of the material.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Senior and junior residents alike enjoyed the process of an oral board simulation as an alternative to a more formal lecture. Seniors also stated that they felt more confident with their ability to pass the oral certification examination after having gone through oral board testing while in residency. Overall, the case was rated relatively highly, with residents scoring the case as 4.3 ± 0.186, 95% confidence interval (1-5 Likert scale, 5 being excellent, n=53) after their assessment was completed.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Students and residents who participated in the oral board exam formatting found this to be preferable to a traditional lecture and enjoyed the learning environment. Faculty also found this type of participation to be more engaging and were pleased with the ability to perform high-stress assessments with low stakes. The content contained in the case is relevant to all emergency medicine trainees, and this formatting forces the learner to be an active participant in the learning session. The case is a good model for the high-stakes testing of the oral certification exam and is an effective way to test a resident's ability to rapidly assess and manage a life-threatening condition in the ED.</p><p><strong>Topics: </strong>Sickle cell anemia, vaso-occlusive pain crisis, acute chest syndrome, hypoxia, pneumonia, sepsis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73721,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of education & teaching in emergency medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10332774/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of education & teaching in emergency medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21980/J80S8J\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of education & teaching in emergency medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21980/J80S8J","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
听众:急诊医学住院医师和急诊医学轮转的医学生。简介:急性胸综合征是镰状细胞病的一种危及生命的潜在灾难性并发症。大约50%的镰状细胞病患者会出现这种情况,全因死亡率高达13%最常见于2-4岁的儿童,高达80%的先前诊断为急性胸综合征的患者会复发诊断标准包括肺部影像学新浸润并伴有以下任何症状:发热> 38.5°C(101.3°F)、咳嗽、喘息、低氧血症(PaO2 < 60 mm Hg)、呼吸急促或胸痛。4,5急性胸综合征的病理生理包括肺血管血管闭塞导致缺氧、炎症介质释放、酸中毒和肺组织梗死。最常见的沉淀物是感染(病毒或细菌)、肋骨梗死和脂肪栓塞。患者通常表现为发热、呼吸困难、咳嗽、寒战、胸痛或咯血。诊断是通过身体检查、血液检查和胸部成像来完成的。1,2胸片被认为是成像方式的金标准5 .急性胸综合征的治疗包括静脉注射晶体溶液、抗生素、明智的镇痛、吸氧,严重者应输血急诊医师应保持急性胸综合征作为一个不能错过的,高后果的鉴别诊断所有患者镰状细胞病呈现到急诊科。教育目标:在口试结束时,考生将:1)展示获得完整病史的能力;2)证明有能力对呼吸窘迫患者进行详细的身体检查;3)识别呼吸窘迫和缺氧患者并进行适当的管理(给氧,将患者置于监护仪上);4)探讨急性胸综合征、肺炎、急性冠状动脉综合征、急性充血性心力衰竭、急性主动脉夹层和急性肺栓塞的广泛鉴别诊断;5)列出适当的实验室和影像学检查,以区分急性胸综合征与其他诊断(全血细胞计数、综合代谢、脑钠肽(BNP)、乳酸、降钙素原、心电图、肌钙蛋白水平、d-二聚体、胸片);6)识别急性胸综合征患者并进行适当的处理(静脉注射止痛药,血液培养后使用抗生素,血液科紧急会诊)和7)在血液科会诊后对重症监护病房进行适当的处理。教学方法:本案例用于评估学习者快速评估呼吸窘迫患者的能力。学习者需要处理有限的鉴别诊断清单,同时稳定和治疗病人。“患者”成为病例的积极参与者,反复要求使用止痛药,并需要适当的镇痛药作为关键行动。对于教师来说,这个案例是用来帮助在急诊科(ED)的住院医生进行定期评估。我们使用口头委员会测试作为评估居民批判性思维的额外工具,同时仍然施加通过口头认证考试所需的压力。大量的住院医师可以在短时间内接受评估,而不需要“等待”这个特定的病人的陈述出现在电子教学中。在这种情况下,学习者使用免费的在线评估工具——谷歌表格进行评估。每个关键动作都写了多个问题,谷歌表单作为这些信息的在线评估和存储库。然后将该病例的关键行动与急诊医学里程碑联系起来,并将结果汇编用于住院医师临床能力评估。住院医生可以立即获得他们的表现反馈,并在需要时提供他们的电子评估。研究方法:为了评估案例的优势和劣势,在案例完成后,学习者和教师有机会提供电子反馈。后续的修改是根据反馈进行的。此外,学生在案例之后回答书面选择题,以评估材料的保留情况。结果:高年级和低年级的住院医生都很喜欢口头板模拟的过程,而不是更正式的讲座。学长们也表示,在实习期间通过口头委员会考试后,他们对自己通过口头认证考试的能力更有信心。总体而言,居民对该病例的评分较高,为4.3±0分。 186, 95%置信区间(1-5 Likert量表,5为优,n=53)。讨论:参加口语考试格式的学生和住院医师发现这比传统的讲座更可取,并且喜欢学习环境。教师们还发现这种参与方式更有吸引力,并且对能够以低风险进行高压力评估感到满意。案例中包含的内容与所有急诊医学学员相关,这种格式迫使学习者积极参与学习。该病例为口腔认证考试的高风险测试提供了一个很好的模型,是测试住院医生快速评估和处理危及生命疾病的能力的有效方法。主题:镰状细胞性贫血,血管闭塞性疼痛危像,急性胸综合征,缺氧,肺炎,败血症。
Audience: Emergency medicine residents and medical students on emergency medicine rotations.
Introduction: Acute chest syndrome is a life-threatening, potentially catastrophic complication of sickle cell disease.1,2 It occurs in approximately 50% of patients with sickle cell disease, with up to 13% all-cause mortality.1 Most common in children aged 2-4, up to 80% of patients with a prior diagnosis of acute chest syndrome will have recurrence of this syndrome.4 Diagnostic criteria include a new infiltrate on pulmonary imaging combined with any of the following: fever > 38.5°C (101.3°F), cough, wheezing, hypoxemia (PaO2 < 60 mm Hg), tachypnea, or chest pain.4,5 The pathophysiology of acute chest syndrome involves vaso-occlusion in pulmonary vessels resulting in hypoxia, release of inflammatory mediators, acidosis, and infarction of lung tissue. The most common precipitants are infections (viral or bacterial), rib infarction, and fat emboli.1,2,4 Patients commonly present with fever, dyspnea, cough, chills, chest pain, or hemoptysis. Diagnosis is made through physical exam, blood work, and chest imaging.1,2 Chest radiograph is considered the gold standard for imaging modality.3 Management of acute chest syndrome includes hydration with IV crystalloid solutions, antibiotics, judicious analgesia, oxygen, and, in severe cases, transfusion.6 Emergency medicine practitioners should keep acute chest syndrome as a cannot miss, high consequence differential diagnosis for all patients with sickle cell disease presenting to the Emergency Department.
Educational objectives: At the end of this oral board session, examinees will: 1) demonstrate the ability to obtain a complete medical history; 2) demonstrate the ability to perform a detailed physical examination in a patient with respiratory distress; 3) identify a patient with respiratory distress and hypoxia and manage appropriately (administer oxygen, place patient on monitor); 4) investigate the broad differential diagnoses which include acute chest syndrome, pneumonia, acute coronary syndrome, acute congestive heart failure, acute aortic dissection and acute pulmonary embolism; 5) list the appropriate laboratory and imaging studies to differentiate acute chest syndrome from other diagnoses (complete blood count, comprehensive metabolic panel, brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), lactic acid, procalcitonin, EKG, troponin level, d-dimer, chest radiograph); 6) identify a patient with acute chest syndrome and manage appropriately (administer intravenous pain medications, administer antibiotics after obtaining blood cultures, emergent consultation with hematology) and 7) provide appropriate disposition to the intensive care unit after consultation with hematology.
Educational methods: This case is used as a method to assess learners' ability to rapidly assess a patient in respiratory distress. The learner needs to address a limited differential diagnosis list while simultaneously stabilizing and treating the patient. The "patient" becomes an active participant in the case, with repeated requests for pain medication, and appropriate analgesic administration is required as a critical action. For faculty, this case is used to assist with periodic assessment of resident performance while in the emergency department (ED).We use oral board testing as one additional tool to assess residents' critical thinking, while still applying the pressure that is needed to pass the oral certification examination. Large groups of residents can be assessed in short periods of time without needing to "wait" for this particular patient presentation to be seen in the ED.In this case, learners were assessed using a free online evaluation tool, Google forms. Multiple questions were written for each critical action, and the Google form served as the online evaluation and repository of this information. The critical actions of the case were then tied to Emergency Medicine Milestones, and the results were compiled for use during resident clinical competency evaluations. Residents were provided with immediate feedback of their performance and were also given their electronic evaluations when requested.
Research methods: To assess the strengths and weaknesses of the case, learners and instructors were given the opportunity to provide electronic feedback after the case was completed. Subsequent modifications were made based on the feedback provided. Additionally, learners answered written multiple-choice questions after the case to assess for retention of the material.
Results: Senior and junior residents alike enjoyed the process of an oral board simulation as an alternative to a more formal lecture. Seniors also stated that they felt more confident with their ability to pass the oral certification examination after having gone through oral board testing while in residency. Overall, the case was rated relatively highly, with residents scoring the case as 4.3 ± 0.186, 95% confidence interval (1-5 Likert scale, 5 being excellent, n=53) after their assessment was completed.
Discussion: Students and residents who participated in the oral board exam formatting found this to be preferable to a traditional lecture and enjoyed the learning environment. Faculty also found this type of participation to be more engaging and were pleased with the ability to perform high-stress assessments with low stakes. The content contained in the case is relevant to all emergency medicine trainees, and this formatting forces the learner to be an active participant in the learning session. The case is a good model for the high-stakes testing of the oral certification exam and is an effective way to test a resident's ability to rapidly assess and manage a life-threatening condition in the ED.