Novice emergency physician ultrasonography of optic nerve sheath diameter compared to ophthalmologist fundoscopic evaluation for papilledema.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to determine the sensitivity and specificity of novice emergency physician-performed point-of-care ultrasound diagnosis of papilledema using optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD) against ophthalmologist-performed dilated fundoscopy. This observational study retrospectively analyzed results of ultrasound-measured ONSD of emergency department (ED) patients with suspected intracranial hypertension from a period spanning June 2014 to October 2017. METHODS: This study concerns a population of ED patients at a large, tertiary-care urban academic medical center from June 2014 to October 2017 over the age of 18 years with primary vision complaints evaluated for papilledema both by an emergency physician-performed ultrasound and an ophthalmologist-performed fundoscopic examination during their ED stay. Sensitivity and specificity of emergency physician-performed ultrasound measurement of optic nerve sheath diameter in the diagnosis of papilledema were primary outcomes for this study. RESULTS: A total of 206 individual patients (male 49%, female 51%; median age 45 years) were included in the study with a total of 212 patient encounters. Calculated sensitivity for the ocular ultrasound examination performed by emergency physicians to diagnose papilledema was 46.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 32.5% to 61.7%), and specificity was 87.0% (95% CI, 82.8% to 90.5%). Positive predictive value and negative predictive value were calculated to be 35.4% (95% CI, 23.9% to 48.2%) and 91.5% (95% CI, 87.8% to 94.4%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Sonographic measurement of ONSD by emergency physicians has low sensitivity but high specificity for detection of papilledema compared to ophthalmologist-conducted fundoscopy.

Car Ratings Take a Back Seat to Vehicle Type: Outcomes of SUV Versus Passenger Car Crashes.

Background: Car safety ratings are routinely utilized in making automobile purchase decisions. These 1- to 5-star ratings are based on crash test data comparing vehicles of similar type, size and weight. Objectives: We hypothesized that car safety ratings are less important than vehicle factors such as vehicle type and weight in predicting outcomes of head-on crashes. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on severe head-on motor vehicle crashes entered into the FARS (Fatality Analysis Reporting System) database between 1995 and 2010. This database includes all US motor vehicle crashes that resulted in a death within 30 days of the accident. Outcomes of SUV versus passenger car and passenger car versus passenger car head-on crashes were compared by safety rating. Exclusion criteria was added to eliminate collisions with insufficient information or unbelted passengers. The paired crash results were entered into a logistic regression model with driver death as the outcome of interest. Results: The database contained 83,251 vehicles of any type that were involved in head-on crashes. In head-on crashes where the passenger car front driver crash rating was superior to the SUV's, the odds of death were 4.52 times higher for the driver of the passenger car (95% CI: 3.06-6.66). Ignoring crash ratings, the odds of death were 7.64 times higher for the passenger car driver (95% CI: 5.59-10.44). In passenger car versus passenger car head-on crashes, a lower car safety rating was associated with a 1.28 times higher odds of death (95% CI: 1.05-1.57). In passenger car vs. passenger car head-on crashes, each one point lower car safety rating resulted in a 1.22 times higher odds of death (95% CI: 1.03-1.44). Conclusion: Vehicle type (passenger car versus SUV) is a much more important predictor of death than crash safety ratings in SUV versus passenger car head-on crashes.

Skin tapes and tissue adhesive vs. either method alone for laceration repair in a porcine model.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the combination of skin tapes and tissue adhesive is superior to either method alone for laceration repair. METHODS: This was a prospective, longitudinal experiment on six anesthetized swine. Thirty-six full-thickness linear wounds were created using a metal template, then closed using one of three methods: skin tapes over benzoin, tissue adhesive, or a combination of both. The study was done in two parts. Group 1 (immediate excision) animals were euthanized at day zero for skin excision and tensile strength testing following wound repair. Group 2 (delayed excision) had initial wound repair; animals were euthanized at day 35 for skin excision and tensile strength testing. RESULTS: In Group 1, the combination of skin tapes and tissue adhesive provided the strongest immediate wound closure. Average mean force for disruption immediately after wound repair was 19.9 lbs. for the tapes and tissue adhesive group compared to 9.6 lbs. for adhesive alone and 8.9 lbs. for tapes alone. The difference in mean force for combination repair vs. tapes alone was 10.3 lbs. (95% CI 4.1, 16.7), and combination vs. adhesive alone was 10.9 lbs. (95% CI 4.7, 17.3). In Group 2, the mean force required for laceration disruption for those repaired with both tape and tissue adhesive was 188.9 lbs. The mean force until wound disruption for tape only was 165.6 lbs., and the mean force until wound disruption for tissue adhesive alone was 118.9 lbs. The difference in mean force required for wound disruption for those repaired with adhesive alone vs. combination repair is 66.5 lbs. (95% CI 21.2, 111.9). The difference in mean force required for wound disruption between the other two groups was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that the combination of skin tapes and tissue adhesive provides superior immediate wound closure strength to either of these methods alone in a porcine model.