Training in and comfort with diagnosis and management of ophthalmic emergencies among emergency medicine physicians in the United States.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Patients with ophthalmic emergencies often present to emergency rooms. Emergency medicine (EM) physicians should feel comfortable encountering these conditions. We assessed EM physicians' comfort working up, diagnosing, and managing ophthalmic emergencies. SUBJECTS/METHODS: 329 EM physicians participated in this cross-sectional multicentre survey. Questions inquired about the amount, type, and self-perceived adequacy of ophthalmic training. Likert scales were used to assess confidence and comfort working up, diagnosing, and managing ophthalmic emergencies. RESULTS: Participants recall receiving a median of 5 and 10 h of ophthalmic training in medical school and residency, respectively. Few feel this prepared them for residency (16.5%) or practice (52.0%). Only 50.6% feel confident with their ophthalmic exam. Most (75.0%) feel confident in their ability to identify an ophthalmic emergency, but 58.8% feel well prepared to work them up. Responders feel more comfortable diagnosing acute retrobulbar hematoma (72.5%), retinal detachment (69.8%), and acute angle closure glaucoma (78.0%) than central retinal artery occlusion (28.9%) or giant cell arteritis (53.2%). Only 60.2% feel comfortable determining if canthotomy and cantholysis is necessary in the setting of acute retrobulbar hematoma, and 40.3% feel comfortable performing the procedure. There was a trend towards attending physicians and providers in urban and academic settings feeling more comfortable diagnosing and managing ophthalmic emergencies compared to trainees, non-urban, and non-academic physicians. CONCLUSIONS: Many participants do not feel comfortable using ophthalmic equipment, performing an eye exam, making vision or potentially life-saving diagnoses, or performing vision-saving procedures, suggesting the need to increase ophthalmic training in EM curricula.

Ultrasound in the evaluation of penetrating thoraco-abdominal trauma: a review of the literature.

The use of ultrasound in the evaluation of blunt thoraco-abdominal trauma is well described. Evidence for the use of ultrasound in the evaluation of penetrating cardio-thoracic and abdominal trauma, however, is more limited and varied. Current literature demonstrates that ultrasound is an excellent screening tool for penetrating thoracic and cardiac injuries with a high sensitivity for detecting injury requiring acute intervention. For abdominal injuries, however, the sensitivity for detection of injury is low and thus the utility of ultrasound as a screening tool is limited. This review summarizes the existing literature addressing the clinical utility of ultrasound for penetrating trauma to the pericardium, thorax and abdomen.