No abstract

Objective: On-scene prehospital conditions and patient instability may warrant a during-transport ultrasound (US) exam. The objective of this study was to assess the effect of ambulance turbulence on the performance of the Focused Assessment with Sonography in Trauma (FAST) with a handheld US device. Methods: This was a randomized controlled trial in which participants were randomized to perform a FAST in either a stationary or an in-motion military ambulance. Participants were physicians and physician assistants (PAs) with previous FAST training. All exams were performed on an US phantom model. The primary outcome was FAST completion time, reported as a mean, in seconds. Secondary outcomes included image acquisition score (range of 0-24, reported as a mean), diagnostic accuracy (reported as sensitivity and specificity), and a post-participation survey with five-item Likert-type scales. Results: Twenty-seven participants performed 27 FASTs, 14 in the stationary ambulance and 13 in the in-motion ambulance. All participants obtained the four requisite views of the FAST. A significant difference was detected in image acquisition scores in favor of the stationary ambulance group (19.4 versus 16.7 [95% CI for difference, 0.9-4.4]; P <.01). Significant differences in survey items between groups were related to obtaining and maintaining US images and the exam conditions. There was not a difference in FAST completion time between groups (98.5 seconds versus 78.7 seconds [95% CI for difference, -13.5 seconds to 53.1 seconds]; P = .23). Sensitivity and specificity of FAST in the stationary ambulance was 85.7% (95% CI, 67.3%-96.0%) and 96.4% (95% CI, 81.7%-99.9%) versus 96.2% (95% CI, 80.4%-99.9%) and 100.0% (95% CI, 86.8%-100.0%) in the in-motion ambulance group (P = .21). Conclusion: Vehicular motion did not affect FAST completion time and diagnostic accuracy; however, it did reduce FAST image acquisition scores. The results suggest timely and diagnostically accurate FASTs may be completed by experienced sonographers during moderate levels of ambulance turbulence. Further investigation assessing the utility and limitations of newer handheld US devices in various prehospital conditions is warranted.

Background Point-of-injury extended focused assessment with sonography in trauma (eFAST) may identify life-threatening torso hemorrhage and expedite casualty evacuation. The purpose of this study was to compare combat medic eFAST performance between the novel and conventional ultrasound (US) transducers. Methods We conducted a randomized crossover trial. Medic participants, previously naïve to US, were randomized to the type of transducer first utilized. The primary outcome was eFAST completion time in seconds. Secondary outcomes included diagnostic accuracy, technical adequacy, and transducer ease-of-use rating. Results Forty medics performed 160 eFASTs. We found a statistically significant difference in eFAST completion times in favor of conventional transducers (304 vs. 358 s; P = 0.03). There was no statistically significant difference between the conventional and novel transducers in terms of diagnostic accuracy (97.7% vs. 96.0%; P = 0.25) and technical adequacy (65% vs. 72.5%; P = 0.11). Median transducer ease-of-use rating (Likert 1–5 scale) was statistically significant in favor of the conventional transducers (5 vs. 4; P = &lt; 0.001). Conclusions Extended focused assessment with sonography in trauma exam times was faster with the conventional transducers. Combat medics performed diagnostically accurate eFASTs with both transducer types in a simulated aid station setting after a brief training intervention. Conventional transducers were rated higher for ease-of-use.

Introduction Hemorrhage is the leading cause of preventable death on the battlefield, and hemostasis is particularly challenging to achieve at junctional sites such as the axillary or inguinal regions. Mission-oriented protective posture (MOPP) gear, as worn most recently in Syria to guard against chemical weapons, can make the performance of technical skills more challenging still. The objective of this study was to evaluate how wearing MOPP gear affects the application time of the SAM Medical Junctional Tourniquet (SJT) by U.S. Army combat medics. Materials and Methods We conducted a prospective, randomized control trial evaluating time for SJT application between participants wearing MOPP versus those not wearing MOPP. Secondary outcomes included SJT application success rate and participant appraisal of SJT application difficulty assessed with five-point Likert items, between groups. Participants placed SJTs on robotic simulation mannequins with a penetrating inguinal injury. Results In April 2019, we enrolled 49 combat medics. Most participants were male (77.5%), had a median age of 25 (interquartile range 23–28), and in the grade of E4 or less (63.3%). Mean SJT application times in seconds were higher among those wearing MOPP versus those who were not (223.1 versus 167.2; 95% confidence interval for difference in means 5.293, 106.374; P = 0.03). Participants wearing MOPP had a less successful application rate overall, but this difference was not statistically significant (64.3% versus 81.0%, P = 0.34). Compared to participants not wearing MOPP, those wearing MOPP agreed that SJT application was difficult (4 versus 3, P = 0.03), what they were wearing affected SJT application (4 versus 2, P = 0.01), and it was difficult to use their hands during SJT application (4 versus 1, P &lt; 0.001). Conclusions Wearing military MOPP gear significantly prolongs the amount of time required for combat medics to apply an SJT on a simulated casualty with a penetrating inguinal injury. This study highlights the importance of incorporating MOPP gear into medical training scenarios to improve skills competency while wearing these protective garments.

No abstract