Comparison of in-person versus tele-ultrasound point-of-care ultrasound training during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Lack of training is currently the most common barrier to implementation of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) use in clinical practice, and in-person POCUS continuing medical education (CME) courses have been paramount in improving this training gap. Due to travel restrictions and physical distancing requirements during the COVID-19 pandemic, most in-person POCUS training courses were cancelled. Though tele-ultrasound technology has existed for several years, use of tele-ultrasound technology to deliver hands-on training during a POCUS CME course has not been previously described. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational study comparing educational outcomes, course evaluations, and learner and faculty feedback from in-person versus tele-ultrasound POCUS courses. The same POCUS educational curriculum was delivered to learners by the two course formats. Data from the most recent pre-pandemic in-person course were compared to tele-ultrasound courses during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Pre- and post-course knowledge test scores of learners from the in-person (n = 88) and tele-ultrasound course (n = 52) were compared. Though mean pre-course knowledge test scores were higher among learners of the tele-ultrasound versus in-person course (78% vs. 71%; p = 0.001), there was no significant difference in the post-course test scores between learners of the two course formats (89% vs. 87%; p = 0.069). Both learners and faculty rated the tele-ultrasound course highly (4.6-5.0 on a 5-point scale) for effectiveness of virtual lectures, tele-ultrasound hands-on scanning sessions, and course administration. Faculty generally expressed less satisfaction with their ability to engage with learners, troubleshoot image acquisition, and provide feedback during the tele-ultrasound course but felt learners completed the tele-ultrasound course with a better basic POCUS skillset. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to a traditional in-person course, tele-ultrasound POCUS CME courses appeared to be as effective for improving POCUS knowledge post-course and fulfilling learning objectives. Our findings can serve as a roadmap for educators seeking guidance on development of a tele-ultrasound POCUS training course whose demand will likely persist beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.

Seroprevalence of sars-cov-2 antibodies and associated factors in health care workers

Objectives: To estimate the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among HCWs, and to study the factors associated with this seroprevalence. Material and methods: A cross-sectional study of HCWs from a Dedicated COVID Hospital was conducted from December 2020 to February 2021. Universal sampling for qualitative testing(by COVID-19 IgG rapid test device by Voxpress) was done and the samples which tested positive were subjected to quantitative testing (chemiluminescent immunoassay) by Serial testing.3 Results A total of 1005 HCWs were tested out of which 124(12.3%) tested positive by qualitative test and 101(10%) tested positive by both tests. Out of the 1005 HCWs, 155(15.4%) were doctors and 496 (49.4%) were nurses. There was statistically no significant difference between the seropositivity of HCWs with regards to the designation, age, place of work, duration of work in this DCH and Comorbidities. Most HCWs received training in Infection prevention and control(IPC) 988(98.3%), used personal protective equipment(PPE) whenever indicated 997(99.2%), performed hand hygiene before and after handling patients or their material 981(97.6%). Out of 1005 HCWs, 116(11.5%) had a history of COVID-19.The seroprevalence in HCWs not having history of COVID-19 was 74(8.3%). Conclusion: Good infection prevention practices can keep the infection rate in HCWs low. HCWs with mild symptoms should also be tested and asymptomatic HCWs should be screened periodically to decrease the spread of COVID-19. © 2021 Journal of Association of Physicians of India. All rights reserved.

Multi-Level Stakeholder Perspectives on Determinants of Point of Care Ultrasound Implementation in a US Academic Medical Center.

There is growing interest from multiple specialties, including internal medicine, to incorporate diagnostic point of care ultrasound (POCUS) into standard clinical care. However, few internists currently use POCUS. The objective of this study was to understand the current determinants of POCUS adoption at both the health system and clinician level at a U.S. academic medical center from the perspective of multi-level stakeholders. We performed semi-structured interviews of multi-level stakeholders including hospitalists, subspecialists, and hospital leaders at an academic medical center in the U.S. Questions regarding the determinants of POCUS adoption were asked of study participants. Using the framework method, team-based analysis of interview transcripts were guided by the contextual domains of the Practical Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM). Thirty-one stakeholders with diverse roles in POCUS adoption were interviewed. Analysis of interviews revealed three overarching themes that stakeholders considered important to adoption by clinicians and health systems: clinical impact, efficiency and cost. Subthemes included two that were deemed essential to high-fidelity implementation: the development of credentialing policies and robust quality assurance processes. These findings identify potential determinants of system and clinician level adoption that may be leveraged to achieve high-fidelity implementation of POCUS applications that result in improved patient outcomes.

Comparison of Lung Ultrasound versus Chest X-ray for Detection of Pulmonary Infiltrates in COVID-19.

Point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) is an attractive alternative to chest X-ray (CXR), but its diagnostic accuracy compared to CXR has not been well studied in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. We conducted a prospective observational study to assess the correlation between LUS and CXR findings in COVID-19 patients. Ninety-six patients with a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 underwent an LUS exam and CXR upon presentation. Physicians blinded to the CXR findings performed all LUS exams. Detection of pulmonary infiltrates by CXR versus LUS was compared between patients categorized as suspected or confirmed COVID-19 based on reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction. Sensitivities and correlation by Kappa statistic were calculated between LUS and CXR. LUS detected pulmonary infiltrates more often than CXR in both suspected and confirmed COVID-19 subjects. The most common LUS abnormalities were discrete B-lines, confluent B-lines, and small subpleural consolidations. Most important, LUS detected unilateral or bilateral pulmonary infiltrates in 55% of subjects with a normal CXR. Substantial agreement was demonstrated between LUS and CXR for normal, unilateral or bilateral findings (Κ = 0.48 (95% CI 0.34 to 0.63)). In patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19, LUS detected pulmonary infiltrates more often than CXR, including more than half of the patients with a normal CXR.