Melissa Myers, Amie Billstrom, Jared Cohen, Ryan Curtis
{"title":"低频与高频探头检测猪模型气胸的灵敏度比较。","authors":"Melissa Myers, Amie Billstrom, Jared Cohen, Ryan Curtis","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Correct diagnosis of pneumothorax in trauma patients is essential. Under-diagnosis can lead to development of life-threatening tension pneumothorax, but overdiagnosis leads to placement of unnecessary chest tubes with potential related morbidity and pain. It is unclear from previous work if there is a benefit to switching from the phased array (low frequency) probe to the linear (high frequency) probe. Is the improvement in image quality worth the time lost changing probes?</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We compared the sensitivity and specificity of a low frequency and high frequency ultrasound probe for the detection of pneumothorax. Images were obtained using swine models and were interpreted by Emergency Medicine residents, attendings, and physician assistants.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found a specificity of 89% and sensitivity of 99% for the low frequency probe and specificity of 96% and sensitivity of 99% for the high frequency probe. There was a statistically different specificity between the two probes, suggesting that the linear probe may be the superior probe for confirming the presence of pneumothorax.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We conclude switching to the linear probe for the thoracic portion of the Extended-Focused Assessment in Trauma will lead to more accurate diagnosis of pneumothorax and decreased false-positive exams.</p>","PeriodicalId":74148,"journal":{"name":"Medical journal (Fort Sam Houston, Tex.)","volume":" PB 8-21-07/08/09","pages":"13-19"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing the Sensitivity of a Low Frequency Versus a High Frequency Probe in the Detection of Pneumothorax in a Swine Model.\",\"authors\":\"Melissa Myers, Amie Billstrom, Jared Cohen, Ryan Curtis\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Correct diagnosis of pneumothorax in trauma patients is essential. Under-diagnosis can lead to development of life-threatening tension pneumothorax, but overdiagnosis leads to placement of unnecessary chest tubes with potential related morbidity and pain. It is unclear from previous work if there is a benefit to switching from the phased array (low frequency) probe to the linear (high frequency) probe. Is the improvement in image quality worth the time lost changing probes?</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We compared the sensitivity and specificity of a low frequency and high frequency ultrasound probe for the detection of pneumothorax. Images were obtained using swine models and were interpreted by Emergency Medicine residents, attendings, and physician assistants.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found a specificity of 89% and sensitivity of 99% for the low frequency probe and specificity of 96% and sensitivity of 99% for the high frequency probe. There was a statistically different specificity between the two probes, suggesting that the linear probe may be the superior probe for confirming the presence of pneumothorax.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We conclude switching to the linear probe for the thoracic portion of the Extended-Focused Assessment in Trauma will lead to more accurate diagnosis of pneumothorax and decreased false-positive exams.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74148,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical journal (Fort Sam Houston, Tex.)\",\"volume\":\" PB 8-21-07/08/09\",\"pages\":\"13-19\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical journal (Fort Sam Houston, Tex.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical journal (Fort Sam Houston, Tex.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparing the Sensitivity of a Low Frequency Versus a High Frequency Probe in the Detection of Pneumothorax in a Swine Model.
Background: Correct diagnosis of pneumothorax in trauma patients is essential. Under-diagnosis can lead to development of life-threatening tension pneumothorax, but overdiagnosis leads to placement of unnecessary chest tubes with potential related morbidity and pain. It is unclear from previous work if there is a benefit to switching from the phased array (low frequency) probe to the linear (high frequency) probe. Is the improvement in image quality worth the time lost changing probes?
Methods: We compared the sensitivity and specificity of a low frequency and high frequency ultrasound probe for the detection of pneumothorax. Images were obtained using swine models and were interpreted by Emergency Medicine residents, attendings, and physician assistants.
Results: We found a specificity of 89% and sensitivity of 99% for the low frequency probe and specificity of 96% and sensitivity of 99% for the high frequency probe. There was a statistically different specificity between the two probes, suggesting that the linear probe may be the superior probe for confirming the presence of pneumothorax.
Conclusion: We conclude switching to the linear probe for the thoracic portion of the Extended-Focused Assessment in Trauma will lead to more accurate diagnosis of pneumothorax and decreased false-positive exams.