定义急诊医师在确认气管插管位置时的即时超声学习曲线。

IF 3.6 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Critical Ultrasound Journal Pub Date : 2015-12-01 Epub Date: 2015-09-17 DOI:10.1186/s13089-015-0031-7
Jordan Chenkin, Colin J L McCartney, Tomislav Jelic, Michael Romano, Claire Heslop, Glen Bandiera
{"title":"定义急诊医师在确认气管插管位置时的即时超声学习曲线。","authors":"Jordan Chenkin,&nbsp;Colin J L McCartney,&nbsp;Tomislav Jelic,&nbsp;Michael Romano,&nbsp;Claire Heslop,&nbsp;Glen Bandiera","doi":"10.1186/s13089-015-0031-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Unrecognized esophageal intubations are associated with significant patient morbidity and mortality. No single confirmatory device has been shown to be 100 % accurate at ruling out esophageal intubations in the emergency department. Recent studies have demonstrated that point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) may be a useful adjunct for confirming endotracheal tube placement; however, the amount of practice required to become proficient at this technique is unclear. The purpose of this study is to determine the amount of practice required by emergency physicians to become proficient at interpreting ultrasound video clips of esophageal and endotracheal intubations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Emergency physicians and emergency medicine residents completed a baseline interpretation test followed by a 10 min online tutorial. They then interpreted POCUS clips of esophageal and endotracheal intubations in a randomly selected order. If an incorrect response was provided, the participant completed another practice session with feedback. This process continued until they correctly interpreted ten consecutive ultrasound clips. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 87 eligible physicians, 66 (75.9 %) completed the study. The mean score on the baseline test was 42.9 % (SD 32.7 %). After the tutorial, 90.9 % (60/66) of the participants achieved proficiency after one practice attempt and 100 % achieved proficiency after two practice attempts. Six intubation ultrasound clips were misinterpreted, for a total error rate of 0.9 % (6/684). Overall, the participants had a sensitivity of 98.3 % (95 % CI 96.3-99.4 %) and specificity of 100 % (95 % CI 98.9-100 %) for detecting correct tube location. Scans were interpreted within an average of 4 s (SD 2.9 s) of the intubation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>After a brief online tutorial and only two practice attempts, emergency physicians were able to quickly and accurately interpret ultrasound intubation clips of esophageal and endotracheal intubations.</p>","PeriodicalId":46598,"journal":{"name":"Critical Ultrasound Journal","volume":"7 1","pages":"14"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2015-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s13089-015-0031-7","citationCount":"47","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Defining the learning curve of point-of-care ultrasound for confirming endotracheal tube placement by emergency physicians.\",\"authors\":\"Jordan Chenkin,&nbsp;Colin J L McCartney,&nbsp;Tomislav Jelic,&nbsp;Michael Romano,&nbsp;Claire Heslop,&nbsp;Glen Bandiera\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13089-015-0031-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Unrecognized esophageal intubations are associated with significant patient morbidity and mortality. No single confirmatory device has been shown to be 100 % accurate at ruling out esophageal intubations in the emergency department. Recent studies have demonstrated that point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) may be a useful adjunct for confirming endotracheal tube placement; however, the amount of practice required to become proficient at this technique is unclear. The purpose of this study is to determine the amount of practice required by emergency physicians to become proficient at interpreting ultrasound video clips of esophageal and endotracheal intubations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Emergency physicians and emergency medicine residents completed a baseline interpretation test followed by a 10 min online tutorial. They then interpreted POCUS clips of esophageal and endotracheal intubations in a randomly selected order. If an incorrect response was provided, the participant completed another practice session with feedback. This process continued until they correctly interpreted ten consecutive ultrasound clips. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 87 eligible physicians, 66 (75.9 %) completed the study. The mean score on the baseline test was 42.9 % (SD 32.7 %). After the tutorial, 90.9 % (60/66) of the participants achieved proficiency after one practice attempt and 100 % achieved proficiency after two practice attempts. Six intubation ultrasound clips were misinterpreted, for a total error rate of 0.9 % (6/684). Overall, the participants had a sensitivity of 98.3 % (95 % CI 96.3-99.4 %) and specificity of 100 % (95 % CI 98.9-100 %) for detecting correct tube location. Scans were interpreted within an average of 4 s (SD 2.9 s) of the intubation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>After a brief online tutorial and only two practice attempts, emergency physicians were able to quickly and accurately interpret ultrasound intubation clips of esophageal and endotracheal intubations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46598,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Ultrasound Journal\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"14\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s13089-015-0031-7\",\"citationCount\":\"47\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Ultrasound Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13089-015-0031-7\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2015/9/17 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Ultrasound Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13089-015-0031-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2015/9/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 47

摘要

背景:未识别的食管插管与显著的患者发病率和死亡率相关。在急诊科,没有单一的确认装置被证明是100%准确地排除食管插管。最近的研究表明,即时超声(POCUS)可能是确认气管内插管放置的有用辅助手段;然而,精通这项技术所需的练习量尚不清楚。本研究的目的是确定急诊医生熟练解读食管和气管插管超声视频片段所需的练习量。方法:急诊医师和急诊住院医师完成基线解释测试,然后进行10分钟的在线教程。然后,他们按随机选择的顺序解释食管和气管插管的POCUS夹。如果给出了不正确的回答,参与者将完成另一个带有反馈的练习环节。这个过程一直持续到他们正确地解读了10个连续的超声波片段。采用描述性统计对数据进行汇总。结果:87名符合条件的医生中,66名(75.9%)完成了研究。基线测试的平均得分为42.9% (SD为32.7%)。辅导结束后,90.9%(60/66)的参与者经过一次练习达到熟练程度,100%的参与者经过两次练习达到熟练程度。6个插管超声夹被误读,总误差率为0.9%(6/684)。总体而言,参与者在检测正确的试管位置方面的敏感性为98.3% (95% CI 96.3- 99.4%),特异性为100% (95% CI 98.9- 100%)。扫描结果在插管后平均4 s (SD 2.9 s)内解释。结论:急诊医师经过简短的在线指导和两次实践尝试后,能够快速准确地解读食管和气管插管超声插管夹。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Defining the learning curve of point-of-care ultrasound for confirming endotracheal tube placement by emergency physicians.

Background: Unrecognized esophageal intubations are associated with significant patient morbidity and mortality. No single confirmatory device has been shown to be 100 % accurate at ruling out esophageal intubations in the emergency department. Recent studies have demonstrated that point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) may be a useful adjunct for confirming endotracheal tube placement; however, the amount of practice required to become proficient at this technique is unclear. The purpose of this study is to determine the amount of practice required by emergency physicians to become proficient at interpreting ultrasound video clips of esophageal and endotracheal intubations.

Methods: Emergency physicians and emergency medicine residents completed a baseline interpretation test followed by a 10 min online tutorial. They then interpreted POCUS clips of esophageal and endotracheal intubations in a randomly selected order. If an incorrect response was provided, the participant completed another practice session with feedback. This process continued until they correctly interpreted ten consecutive ultrasound clips. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data.

Results: Of the 87 eligible physicians, 66 (75.9 %) completed the study. The mean score on the baseline test was 42.9 % (SD 32.7 %). After the tutorial, 90.9 % (60/66) of the participants achieved proficiency after one practice attempt and 100 % achieved proficiency after two practice attempts. Six intubation ultrasound clips were misinterpreted, for a total error rate of 0.9 % (6/684). Overall, the participants had a sensitivity of 98.3 % (95 % CI 96.3-99.4 %) and specificity of 100 % (95 % CI 98.9-100 %) for detecting correct tube location. Scans were interpreted within an average of 4 s (SD 2.9 s) of the intubation.

Conclusions: After a brief online tutorial and only two practice attempts, emergency physicians were able to quickly and accurately interpret ultrasound intubation clips of esophageal and endotracheal intubations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Critical Ultrasound Journal
Critical Ultrasound Journal RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
Point-of-care ultrasound evaluation and puncture simulation of the internal jugular vein by medical students. Interpretation errors in focused cardiac ultrasound by novice pediatric emergency medicine fellow sonologists. Mitral valve velocity time integral and passive leg raise as a measure of volume responsiveness. Diagnostic performance of abdominal point of care ultrasound performed by an emergency physician in acute right iliac fossa pain. Strain analysis for the identification of hypertensive cardiac end-organ damage in the emergency department.
×
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