Multimodular Ultrasound Orientation: Residents' Confidence and Skill in Performing Point-of-care Ultrasound.

Introduction The objectives of this study were to determine if a multimodular introductory ultrasound course improved emergency medicine intern confidence in performing a point-of-care ultrasound and if our educational objectives could be met with our chosen structure. Methods This is a prospective, observational study evaluating three consecutive incoming emergency medicine residency classes from three residency programs. A one-day introductory ultrasound course was delivered. The course consisted of 1) flipped classroom didactics, 2) in-person, case-based interactive teaching sessions, and 3) check-listed, goal-driven, hands-on instruction. Results Over three years, 73 residents participated in this study. There was no significant difference in performance on the written test (p = 0.54) or the skills assessment (p = 0.16) between years. Performance on the written pre-test was not a predictor of performance on the skills test (R2 = 0.028; p = 0.19). Prior to training, residents were most confident in performing a focused assessment with sonography for trauma examination (median confidence 5.5 (interquartile range (IQR): 3 - 7) on a 10-point Likert scale where 1 represents low confidence and 10 represents high confidence). They reported the lowest confidence in performing a cardiac ultrasound (3 (IQR: 2 - 6)). Following training, residents reported increased confidence with all applications (p < 0.001). Eighty-five percent (confidence interval (CI): 73, 92) of residents agreed that the online ultrasound lectures effectively teach point-of-care ultrasound applications and 98% (CI: 88, 100) agreed that case-based interactive sessions helped them understand how ultrasound changes the management of acutely ill patients. Conclusions A written test of knowledge regarding the use of point-of-care ultrasound does not correlate with procedural skills at the start of residency, suggesting that teaching and evaluation of both types of skills are necessary. Following a multimodular introductory ultrasound course, residents showed increased confidence in performing the seven basic ultrasound applications. Residents reported that an asynchronous curriculum and case-based interactive sessions met the learning objectives and effectively taught point-of-care ultrasound applications.

How well will you FIT? Use of a modified MMI to assess applicants' compatibility with an emergency medicine residency program.

PURPOSE: Emergency medicine residency programs have evaluated the use of Multiple Mini Interviews (MMIs) for applicants. The authors developed an MMI-style method called the Fast Interview Track (FIT) to predict an applicant's 'fit' within an individual residency program. METHODS: Applicants meet with up to five residents and are asked one question by each. Residents score the applicant using a Likert scale from 1 to 5 on two questions: 'How well does the applicant think on his/her feet?' and 'How well do you think the applicant will fit in here?'. To assess how well these questions predicted a resident's 'fit', current residents scored fellow residents on these same questions. These scores were compared with the residents' interview FIT scores. A postmatch survey of applicants who did not match at this program solicited applicants' attitudes toward the FIT sessions. RESULTS: Among the junior class, the correlation between interview and current scores was significant for question 1 (rho=0.5192 [p=0.03]) and question 2 (rho=0.5753 [p=0.01]). Among seniors, Spearman's rho was statistically significant for question 2, though not statistically significant for question 1. The chi-square measure of high scores (4-5) versus low scores (1-3) found a statistically significant association between interview and current scores for interns and juniors. Of the 29 responses to the postmatch survey, 16 (55%) felt FIT sessions provided a good sense of the program's personality and only 6 (21%) disagreed. Nine (31%) felt FIT sessions positively impacted our program's ranking and 11 (38%) were 'Neutral'. Only two (7%) reported that FIT sessions negatively impacted their ranking of our program. CONCLUSIONS: FIT provided program leadership with a sense of an applicant's 'fit' within this program. Interview day scores correlated with scores received during residency. Most applicants report a positive experience with FIT sessions. FIT provides a useful tool to recruit applicants who fit with the residency program.

Physician documentation of sepsis syndrome is associated with more aggressive treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Timely recognition and treatment of sepsis improves survival. The objective is to examine the association between recognition of sepsis and timeliness of treatments. METHODS: We identified a retrospective cohort of emergency department (ED) patients with positive blood cultures from May 2007 to January 2009, and reviewed vital signs, imaging, laboratory data, and physician/nursing charts. Patients who met systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria and had evidence of infection available to the treating clinician at the time of the encounter were classified as having sepsis. Patients were dichotomized as RECOGNIZED if sepsis was explicitly articulated in the patient record or if a sepsis order set was launched, or as UNRECOGNIZED if neither of these two criteria were met. We used median regression to compare time to antibiotic administration and total volume of fluid resuscitation between groups, controlling for age, sex, and sepsis severity. RESULTS: SIRS criteria were present in 228/315 (72.4%) cases. Our record review identified sepsis syndromes in 214 (67.9%) cases of which 118 (55.1%) had sepsis, 64 (29.9%) had severe sepsis, and 32 (15.0%) had septic shock. The treating team contemplated sepsis (RECOGNIZED) in 123 (57.6%) patients. Compared to the UNRECOGNIZED group, the RECOGNIZED group had a higher use of antibiotics in the ED (91.9 vs.75.8%, p=0.002), more patients aged 60 years or older (56.9 vs. 33.0%, p=0.001), and more severe cases (septic shock: 18.7 vs. 9.9%, severe sepsis: 39.0 vs.17.6%, sepsis: 42.3 vs.72.5%; p<0.001). The median time to antibiotic (minutes) was lower in the RECOGNIZED (142) versus UNRECOGNIZED (229) group, with an adjusted median difference of -74 minutes (95% CI [-128 to -19]). The median total volume of fluid resuscitation (mL) was higher in the RECOGNIZED (1,600 mL) compared to the UNRECOGNIZED (1,000 mL) group. However, the adjusted median difference was not statistically significant: 262 mL (95% CI [ -171 to 694 mL]). CONCLUSION: Patients whose emergency physicians articulated sepsis syndrome in their documentation or who launched the sepsis order set received antibiotics sooner and received more total volume of fluid. Age <60 and absence of fever are factors associated with lack of recognition of sepsis cases.

Alternative methods to central venous pressure for assessing volume status in critically ill patients.

INTRODUCTION: Early goal-directed therapy increases survival in persons with sepsis but requires placement of a central line. We evaluate alternative methods to measuring central venous pressure (CVP) to assess volume status, including peripheral venous pressure (PVP) and stroke volume variation (SVV), which may facilitate nurse-driven resuscitation protocols. METHODS: Patients were enrolled in the emergency department or ICU of an academic medical center. Measurements of CVP, PVP, SVV, shoulder and elbow position, and dichotomous variables Awake, Movement, and Vented were measured and recorded 7 times during a 1-hour period. Regression analysis was used to predict CVP from PVP and/or SVV, shoulder/elbow position, and dichotomous variables. RESULTS: Twenty patients were enrolled, of which 20 had PVP measurements and 11 also had SVV measurements. Multiple regression analysis demonstrated significant predictive relationships for CVP using PVP (CVP = 6.7701 + 0.2312 × PVP - 0.1288 × Shoulder + 12.127 × Movement - 4.4805 × Neck line), SVV (CVP = 14.578 - 0.3951 × SVV + 18.113 × Movement), and SVV and PVP (CVP = 4.2997 - 1.1675 × SVV + 0.3866 × PVP + 18.246 × Awake + 0.1467 × Shoulder = 0.4525 × Elbow + 15.472 × Foot line + 10.202 × Arm line). DISCUSSION: PVP and SVV are moderately good predictors of CVP. Combining PVP and SVV and adding variables related to body position, movement, ventilation, and sleep/wake state further improves the predictive value of the model. The models illustrate the importance of standardizing patient position, minimizing movement, and placing intravenous lines proximally in the upper extremity or neck.

Would earlier microbe identification alter antibiotic therapy in bacteremic emergency department patients?

BACKGROUND: Although debate exists about the treatment of sepsis, few disagree about the benefits of early, appropriately targeted antibiotic administration. STUDY OBJECTIVES: To determine the appropriateness of empiric antimicrobial therapy and the extent to which therapy would be altered if the causative organism for sepsis was known at the time of administration. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study, conducted in an academic Emergency Department (ED), on consecutive positive blood cultures between November 1, 2008 and February 1, 2009. Blood cultures and the appropriateness of administered antimicrobial therapy were evaluated. Therapy choices were categorized based on whether or not a physician, complying with antimicrobial guidelines, would have made changes to empiric antibiotic therapy had the causative organism initially been known. RESULTS: There were 90 positive blood cultures obtained from 84 patients. Of these, 21.1% (n=19) were considered contaminants. The final categorization of empiric antibiotics given in the ED for the remaining blood culture results were: 1) therapy would be changed to narrower-spectrum antibiotics (n=34, 55.7%); 2) therapy would be changed because the organism was not covered (n=13, 21.3%); and 3) therapy would remain the same (n=14, 23.0%). There was 90.2% inter-rater agreement for these classifications (p<0.0001), with a kappa of 0.84. Polymerase chain reaction analysis had a statistically significant advantage (p<0.0001) over Infectious Disease Society of America protocols in facilitating accurate antimicrobial therapies. CONCLUSION: This study confirms the need for more rapid and accurate laboratory methods for bloodstream pathogen identification.