Department of Emergency Medicine, Inje University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2012 Jul-Sep;16(3):400-6. doi: 10.3109/10903127.2012.664242. Epub 2012 Mar 2.
We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) examinations when used by emergency medical technicians (EMTs) to detect the presence of free abdominal fluid.
Six level 1 EMTs (similar to intermediate EMTs in the United States) who worked at a tertiary emergency department in Korea underwent an educational program consisting of two one-hour didactic lectures that included the principles of ultrasonography, the anatomy of the abdomen, and two hours of hands-on practice. After this educational session, the EMTs performed FAST examinations on a convenience sample of patients from July 1 to October 5, 2009. These patients also received an abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan regardless of their chief complaints. The CT findings served as the definitive standard and were interpreted routinely and independently by emergency radiologists who were blinded to the study protocol. In addition, the EMTs were blinded to the CT findings. A positive CT finding was defined as the presence of free fluid, as interpreted by the radiologist. The sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Informed consent was obtained from all participating patients.
Among the 1,060 eligible patients with abdominal CT scans, 403 patients were asked to participate in the study, and 240 patients agreed. Of these 240 patients, 80 (33.3%) had results showing the presence of free fluid. Fourteen patients had a significant amount of peritoneal cavity fluid, 15 had a moderate amount of peritoneal cavity fluid, and 51 had a minimal amount of peritoneal cavity fluid. Compared with the CT findings, the diagnostic performance of the FAST examination had a sensitivity of 61.3% (95% CI, 50.3%-71.2%), specificity of 96.3% (95% CI, 92.1%-98.3%), positive predictive value of 89.1% (95% CI, 77.0%-95.4%), and negative predictive value of 83.2% (95% CI, 76.9%-88.2%). For a significant or moderate amount of peritoneal cavity fluid, the sensitivity was considerably higher (86.2%).
EMTs in Korea showed a high diagnostic performance that was comparable to that of surgeons and physicians when detecting peritoneal cavity free fluid in a Korean emergency department setting. The validity of FAST examinations in prehospital care situations should be investigated further.
我们旨在评估急诊医疗技术员(EMT)使用超声检查进行创伤重点评估(FAST)时检测腹腔游离液存在的诊断准确性。
在韩国的一家三级急诊部工作的 6 名 EMT (类似于美国的中级 EMT)参加了一个包括 2 小时的理论讲座(包括超声原理、腹部解剖学)和 2 小时实践的教育课程。在这次教育会议之后,EMT 于 2009 年 7 月 1 日至 10 月 5 日对便利抽样的患者进行了 FAST 检查。这些患者还接受了腹部计算机断层扫描(CT)扫描,无论其主诉如何。CT 检查结果作为确定标准,由对研究方案不知情的急诊放射科医生进行常规和独立的解释。此外,EMT 对 CT 结果不知情。CT 检查阳性定义为放射科医生解释的游离液存在。计算了敏感性、特异性、预测值及其 95%置信区间(CI)。所有参与患者均获得知情同意。
在 1060 名符合腹部 CT 扫描条件的患者中,有 403 名患者被邀请参加研究,有 240 名患者同意。在这 240 名患者中,有 80 名(33.3%)结果显示有游离液。14 名患者腹腔有大量积液,15 名患者腹腔有中等量积液,51 名患者腹腔有少量积液。与 CT 检查结果相比,FAST 检查的诊断性能具有 61.3%(95%CI,50.3%-71.2%)的敏感性、96.3%(95%CI,92.1%-98.3%)的特异性、89.1%(95%CI,77.0%-95.4%)的阳性预测值和 83.2%(95%CI,76.9%-88.2%)的阴性预测值。对于大量或中等量的腹腔积液,敏感性相当高(86.2%)。
在韩国的急诊部环境中,EMT 检测腹腔游离液的诊断性能与外科医生和内科医生相当,表现出较高的诊断性能。在院前急救情况下,FAST 检查的有效性应进一步调查。