Point-of-care ultrasound with handheld devices in hematology: a monocentric single-stage phase II study.

Point of care ultrasound (PoCUS) with pocket-size devices is an efficient and safe imaging modality that became a standard of care in various clinical settings. However, its implementation in hematology has never been evaluated so far. We conducted a prospective monocentric study aiming to harvest data on its usage and to assess its diagnostic and interventional performance in improving the accuracy of basic physical examination in hematological patients. After a focused training program, six hematologists were trained and conducted this study. Sixty-two patients were included. Only in 19 cases, further specialized imaging was required, whereas, in 43 patients PoCUS was sufficient to address the clinical inquiries. The use of PoCUS devices was assessed for its performance difficulty and usefulness perception with satisfactory outcomes. This study represents a proof-of-concept application of PoCUS in hematology, suggesting benefits over the physical examination.KEY POINTSPoCUS is particularly attractive in a hematological setting because able to improve the accuracy of physical examination.A hematology-focused training in PoCUS using handheld devices can allow hematologists to perform bed-side diagnostic and interventional US-based exams.

Accuracy of Emergency Department Clinical Findings for Diagnosis of Coronavirus Disease 2019.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We seek to describe the medical history and clinical findings of patients attending the emergency department (ED) with suspected coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and estimate the diagnostic accuracy of patients' characteristics for predicting COVID-19. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled all patients tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 by reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction in our ED from March 9, 2020, to April 4, 2020. We abstracted medical history, physical examination findings, and the clinical probability of COVID-19 (low, moderate, and high) rated by emergency physicians, depending on their clinical judgment. We assessed diagnostic accuracy of these characteristics for COVID-19 by calculating positive and negative likelihood ratios. RESULTS: We included 391 patients, of whom 225 had positive test results for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction result was more likely to be negative when the emergency physician thought that clinical probability was low, and more likely to be positive when he or she thought that it was high. Patient-reported anosmia and the presence of bilateral B lines on lung ultrasonography had the highest positive likelihood ratio for the diagnosis of COVID-19 (7.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.36 to 24.36; and 7.09, 95% CI 2.77 to 18.12, respectively). The absence of a high clinical probability determined by the emergency physician and the absence of bilateral B lines on lung ultrasonography had the lowest negative likelihood ratio for the diagnosis of COVID-19 (0.33, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.43; and 0.26, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.45, respectively). CONCLUSION: Anosmia, emergency physician estimate of high clinical probability, and bilateral B lines on lung ultrasonography increased the likelihood of identifying COVID-19 in patients presenting to the ED.

Monitoring Personalized Learning Curves for Emergency Ultrasound With Risk-adjusted Learning-curve Cumulative Summation Method.

BACKGROUND: Ultrasound (US) has been a regular practice in emergency departments for several decades. Thus, train our students to US is of prime interest. Because US image acquisition ability can be very different from a patient to another (depending on image quality), it seems relevant to adapt US learning curves (LCs) to patient image quality using tools based on cumulative summation (CUSUM) as the risk-adjusted LC CUSUM (RLC). OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to monitor LC of medical students for the acquisition of abdominal emergency US views and to adapt these curves to patient image quality using RLC. METHODS: We asked medical students to perform abdominal US examinations with the acquisition of 11 views of interest on emergency patients after a learning session. Emergency physicians reviewed the student examinations for validation. LCs were plotted and the student was said proficient for a specific view if his LC reached a predetermined limit fixed by simulation. RESULTS: Seven students with no previous experience in US were enrolled. They performed 19 to 50 examinations of 11 views each. They achieve proficiency for a median of 9 (6-10) views. Aorta and right pleura views were validated by seven students; inferior vena cava, right kidney, and bladder by six; gallbladder and left kidney by five; portal veins and portal hilum by four; and subxyphoid and left pleura by three. The number of US examinations required to reach proficiency ranged from five to 41 depending on the student and on the type of view. LC showed that students reached proficiency with different learning speeds. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that, when monitoring LCs for abdominal emergency US, there is some heterogeneity in the learning process depending on the student skills and the type of view. Therefore, rules based on a predetermined number of examinations to reach proficiency are not satisfactory.