Purpose: This research aimed to determine the number of attempts that emergency physicians need to become proficient in undertaking diaphragmatic ultrasound imaging.Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted at the emergency department (ED) of a tertiary-care university hospital. Sixteen emergency physicians were each required to obtain a set of images of the right hemidiaphragm of five dyspneic patients using both diaphragmatic excursion and thickness techniques. The images were subsequently reviewed by a specialist using American College of Emergency Physician guidelines. If the evaluations of a physician did not reach the expected standard, the physician was to be given feedback and requested to collect images from another five patients. The process was to be repeated until such time as the images obtained by the physician were deemed to be up to standard.Results: Eighty patients, twelve emergency medicine residents, and four attending physicians were enrolled. Following a didactic session on diaphragmatic ultrasound imaging and its interpretation, practicing on five patients proved sufficient to achieve an adequate level of competency in conducting diaphragmatic ultrasound examinations. Conclusion:Practicing on five patients is sufficient for emergency physicians to achieve an adequate level of competency in conducting right-sided diaphragmatic ultrasound examinations.

Background Many early warning scores (EWSs) have been validated to prognosticate adverse outcomes of COVID-19 in the Emergency Department (ED), including the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), and the National Early Warning Score (NEWS). However, the Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) has not been widely validated for this purpose. We aimed to assess and compare the prognostic utility of REMS with that of qSOFA, MEWS, and NEWS for predicting mortality in emergency COVID-19 patients. Methods We conducted a multi-center retrospective study at five EDs of various levels of care in Thailand. Adult patients visiting the ED who tested positive for COVID-19 prior to ED arrival or within the index hospital visit between January and December 2021 were included. Their EWSs at ED arrival were calculated and analysed. The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcome was mechanical ventilation. Results A total of 978 patients were included in the study; 254 (26%) died at hospital discharge, and 155 (15.8%) were intubated. REMS yielded the highest discrimination capacity for in-hospital mortality (the area under the receiver operator characteristics curves (AUROC) 0.771 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.738, 0.804)), which was significantly higher than qSOFA (AUROC 0.620 (95%CI 0.589, 0.651); p < 0.001), MEWS (AUROC 0.657 (95%CI 0.619, 0.694); p < 0.001), and NEWS (AUROC 0.732 (95%CI 0.697, 0.767); p = 0.037). REMS was also the best EWS in terms of calibration, overall model performance, and balanced diagnostic accuracy indices at its optimal cutoff. REMS also performed better than other EWSs for mechanical ventilation. Conclusion REMS was the early warning score with the highest prognostic utility as it outperformed qSOFA, MEWS, and NEWS in predicting in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients in the ED.

Objectives Diaphragmatic dysfunction has been reported as a cause of dyspnea, and its diagnosis can be made using ultrasound. Diaphragmatic ultrasound is mainly used to predict respiratory failure in chronic conditions. The use of diaphragmatic ultrasound has also risen in acute settings, such as emergency departments (EDs). However, the number of studies on its use still needs to be increased. The present study aimed to find the incidence of diaphragmatic dysfunction in the ED. Methods This prospective cohort study was conducted in an ED. We enrolled patients aged greater than 18 years who presented with dyspnea. Diaphragmatic excursion and diaphragmatic thickness techniques were performed. The primary outcome was the incidence of diaphragmatic dysfunction. The secondary outcomes were the associations between diaphragmatic dysfunction and the composition of respiratory therapies within 24 hours, intubation within 24 hours, and 7‐day mortality. Results A total of 237 patients were analyzed. The incidences of diaphragmatic dysfunction assessed by diaphragmatic excursion and diaphragm thickness were 22.4 and 32.1%, respectively. Patients with sepsis and cancer had the highest incidences. Diaphragmatic dysfunction assessed by both techniques was not associated with the composition of respiratory support therapies within 24 hours, intubation within 24 hours, or 7‐day mortality. Conclusions The incidence of diaphragmatic dysfunction in dyspneic patients in the ED ranged from 22.4 to 32.1%, depending on the ultrasound technique. Diaphragmatic dysfunction was not associated with the composition of respiratory support therapies, intubation, or mortality.