We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of digital photographs of plain film chest X-rays (CXRs) obtained using a mobile phone. The study was a randomized, non-inferiority trial, in which physical plain film CXRs viewed on a light box were compared with digital photographs of plain film CXRs. CXRs were selected from a database of radiology studies to show common pathologies found in Botswana associated with pneumonia, lung carcinoma, tuberculosis, pneumothorax and interstitial disease, as well as normal findings. The pre-selected diagnoses were subsequently verified by a second radiologist. Seven radiologists were randomized to review 75 plain film CXRs on light boxes before viewing 75 digital photographs, or vice versa. Their responses were considered correct if they matched the pre-defined diagnosis. For both modalities, the correct diagnosis was provided in 79% of cases; for plain film CXRs, the correct diagnosis was provided in 82% of cases and for digital photographs the correct diagnosis was provided in 76% of cases. The difference in diagnostic accuracy was -5.7% (95% CI: -10.8% to -0.5%), which confirmed non-inferiority (P<0.001) for the primary outcome of diagnostic accuracy. A subgroup analysis demonstrated non-inferiority for lung carcinoma and pneumonia images, although non-inferiority was not achieved for pneumothorax, tuberculosis, interstitial disease or normal images. The study demonstrates that digital photographs of CXRs obtained via a mobile phone equipped with a digital camera are non-inferior to plain film CXRs.

Background Google Glass has been used in a variety of medical settings with promising results. We explored the use and potential value of an asynchronous, near-real time protocol-which avoids transmission issues associated with real-time applications-for recording, uploading, and viewing of high-definition (HD) visual media in the emergency department (ED) to facilitate remote surgical consults. Study Design First-responder physician assistants captured pertinent aspects of the physical examination and diagnostic imaging using Google Glass' HD video or high-resolution photographs. This visual media were then securely uploaded to the study website. The surgical consultation then proceeded over the phone in the usual fashion and a clinical decision was made. The surgeon then accessed the study website to review the uploaded video. This was followed by a questionnaire regarding how the additional data impacted the consultation. Results The management plan changed in 24% (11) of cases after surgeons viewed the video. Five of these plans involved decision making regarding operative intervention. Although surgeons were generally confident in their initial management plan, confidence scores increased further in 44% (20) of cases. In addition, we surveyed 276 ED patients on their opinions regarding concerning the practice of health care providers wearing and using recording devices in the ED. The survey results revealed that the majority of patients are amenable to the addition of wearable technology with video functionality to their care. Conclusions This study demonstrates the potential value of a medically dedicated, hands-free, HD recording device with internet connectivity in facilitating remote surgical consultation.

Background: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have been published by the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) since 1990 to advance evidence-based emergency care. ACEP clinical policies have drawn anecdotal criticism for bias, yet the overall quality of these guidelines has not previously been quantified. We sought to examine ACEP clinical policies using a recognized, validated appraisal instrument: Appraisal of Guideline for Research & Evaluation (AGREE II). Methods: Systematic assessment of current ACEP clinical policies using the AGREE II instrument, which contains 23 appraisal items (scored on a 1-7 scale) in six domains and two overall assessments. Each policy was independently appraised by five trained appraisers. Primary outcomes were AGREE II ratings for each item, domain, and "Overall Assessment," and scores were reported as standardized percentages from all five appraisers. Secondary analyses examined associations between AGREE II ratings and policy publication date, strength of underlying evidence, and strength of recommendations. Additional analysis examined relationships between domain and "Overall Assessment" ratings. Results: Twenty guidelines published from April 2007 to November 2017 were included. Of the six domains, "Scope and Purpose" scored highest (mean 90%) and "Applicability" scored lowest (mean 35%). The four remaining domains ("Stakeholder Involvement," "Rigor of Development,"

No abstract

Introduction: Geriatric patients are often frail and may lose independence through a variety of mechanisms including cognitive decline, reduced mobility, and falls. Our goal was to measure the effect of a multidisciplinary home health program that assessed frailty and safety and then coordinated ongoing delivery of community resources on short-term, all-cause emergency department (ED) utilization across three study arms that attempted to stratify frailty by fall risk.Methods: Subjects became eligible for this prospective observational study via one of three pathways: 1) by visiting the ED after a fall (2,757 patients); 2) by self-identifying as at risk for falling (2,787); or 3) by calling 9-1-1 for a "lift assist" after falling and being unable to get up (121). The intervention consisted of sequential home visits by a research paramedic who used standardized assessments of frailty and risk of falling (including providing home safety guidance), and a home health nurse who aligned resources to address the conditions found. Outcomes of interest were all-cause ED utilization at 30, 60, and 90 days post-intervention compared with subjects who enrolled via the same study pathway but declined the study intervention (controls).Results: Subjects in the fall-related ED visit arm were significantly less likely to have one or more subsequent ED encounters post-intervention than controls at 30 days (18.2% vs 29.2%, P<0.001); 60 days (27.5% vs 39.8%, P<0.001); and 90 days (34.6% vs 46.2%, P<0.001). In contrast, participants in the self-referral arm had no difference in ED encounters post-intervention compared to controls at 30, 60, or 90 days (P=0.30, 0.84, and 0.23, respectively). The size of the 9-1-1 call arm limited statistical power for analysis. Conclusion:A history of a fall requiring ED evaluation appeared to be a useful marker of frailty. Subjects recruited through this pathway experienced less all-cause ED utilization over subsequent months after a coordinated community intervention than without it. The participants who only self-identified as at risk for falling had lower rates of subsequent ED utilization than those recruited in the ED after a fall and did not significantly benefit from the intervention. [