Cargando…

Focused cardiac ultrasound by unselected residents—the challenges

BACKGROUND: Focus Cardiac Ultrasound (FoCUS) performed by internal medicine residents on call with 2 h of training can provide a means for ruling out cardiac disease, but with poor sensitivity. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate diagnostic usefulness as well as diagnostic accuracy of F...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ruddox, Vidar, Norum, Ingvild Billehaug, Stokke, Thomas Muri, Edvardsen, Thor, Otterstad, Jan Erik
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5336635/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28259149
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12880-017-0191-y
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Focus Cardiac Ultrasound (FoCUS) performed by internal medicine residents on call with 2 h of training can provide a means for ruling out cardiac disease, but with poor sensitivity. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate diagnostic usefulness as well as diagnostic accuracy of FoCUS following 4 h of training. METHODS: All residents on call were given a 4-h training course with an additional one-hour training course after 6 months. They were asked to provide a pre- and post-FoCUS diagnosis, with the final diagnosis at discharge as reference. RESULTS: During a 7 month period 113 FoCUS examinations were reported; after 53 were excluded this left 60 for evaluation with a standard echocardiogram performed on average 11.5 h after FoCUS. Examinations were performed on the basis of chest pain and dyspnoea/edema. The best sensitivity was found in terms of the detection of reduced left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) (92%), LV dilatation (85%) and pericardial effusion (100%). High values were noted for negative predictive values, although false positives were seen. A kappa > 0.6 was observed for reduced LVEF, right ventricular area fraction and dilatation of LV and left atrium. In 48% of patients pre- and post-FoCUS diagnoses were identical and concordant with the final diagnosis. Importantly, in 30% examinations FoCUS correctly changed the pre-FoCUS diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: A FoCUS protocol with a 4-h training program gained clinical usefulness in one third of examinations. False positive findings represented the major challenge.