We have located links that may give you full text access.
To determine the accuracy of focused assessment with sonography for trauma done by nonradiologists and its comparative analysis with radiologists in emergency department of a level 1 trauma center of India.
Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock 2013 January
BACKGROUND: Focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) is an important skill during trauma resuscitation. Use of point of care ultrasound among the trauma team working in emergency care settings is lacking in India.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of FAST done by nonradiologists (NR) when compared to radiologists during primary survey of trauma victims in the emergency department of a level 1 trauma center in India.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective study was done during primary survey of resuscitation of nonconsecutive patients in the resuscitation bay. The study subjects included NR such as one consultant emergency medicine, two medicine residents, one orthopedic resident and one surgery resident working as trauma team. These subjects underwent training at 3-day workshop on emergency sonography and performed 20 supervised positive and negative scans for free fluid. The FAST scans were first performed by NR and then by radiology residents (RR). The performers were blinded to each other's sonography findings. Computed tomography (CT) and laparotomy findings were used as gold standard whichever was feasible. Results were compared between both the groups. Intraobserver variability among NR and RR were noted.
RESULTS: Out of 150 scans 144 scans were analyzed. Mean age of the patients was 28 [1-70] years. Out of 24 true positive patients 18 underwent CT scan and exploratory laparotomies were done in six patients. Sensitivity of FAST done by NR and RR were 100% and 95.6% and specificity was 97.5% in both groups. Positive predictive value among NR and RR were 88.8%, 88.46% and negative predictive value were 97.5% and 99.15%. Intraobserver performance variation ranged from 87 to 97%.
CONCLUSION: FAST performed by NRs is accurate during initial trauma resuscitation in the emergency department of a level 1 trauma center in India.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of FAST done by nonradiologists (NR) when compared to radiologists during primary survey of trauma victims in the emergency department of a level 1 trauma center in India.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective study was done during primary survey of resuscitation of nonconsecutive patients in the resuscitation bay. The study subjects included NR such as one consultant emergency medicine, two medicine residents, one orthopedic resident and one surgery resident working as trauma team. These subjects underwent training at 3-day workshop on emergency sonography and performed 20 supervised positive and negative scans for free fluid. The FAST scans were first performed by NR and then by radiology residents (RR). The performers were blinded to each other's sonography findings. Computed tomography (CT) and laparotomy findings were used as gold standard whichever was feasible. Results were compared between both the groups. Intraobserver variability among NR and RR were noted.
RESULTS: Out of 150 scans 144 scans were analyzed. Mean age of the patients was 28 [1-70] years. Out of 24 true positive patients 18 underwent CT scan and exploratory laparotomies were done in six patients. Sensitivity of FAST done by NR and RR were 100% and 95.6% and specificity was 97.5% in both groups. Positive predictive value among NR and RR were 88.8%, 88.46% and negative predictive value were 97.5% and 99.15%. Intraobserver performance variation ranged from 87 to 97%.
CONCLUSION: FAST performed by NRs is accurate during initial trauma resuscitation in the emergency department of a level 1 trauma center in India.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app