Krainin Benjamin M, Thaut Lane C, April Michael D, Curtis Ryan A, Kaelin Andrea L, Hardy Garrett B, Weymouth Wells L, Srichandra Jonathan, Chin Eric J, Summers Shane M
San Antonio Uniformed Services Health Education Consortium, Department of Emergency Medicine, San Antonio, Texas.
West J Emerg Med. 2017 Oct;18(6):1061-1067. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2017.8.35606. Epub 2017 Sep 11.
Our goal was to determine if heated gel for emergency department (ED) bedside ultrasonography improves patient satisfaction compared to room-temperature gel.
We randomized a convenience sample of ED patients determined by their treating physician to require a bedside ultrasound (US) study to either heated gel (102.0° F) or room-temperature gel (82.3° F). Investigators performed all US examinations. We informed all subjects that the study entailed investigation into various measures to improve patient satisfaction with ED US examinations but did not inform them of our specific focus on gel temperature. Investigators wore heat-resistant gloves while performing the examinations to blind themselves to the gel temperature. After completion of the US, subjects completed a survey including the primary outcome measure of patient satisfaction as measured on a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS). A secondary outcome was patient perceptions of sonographer professionalism measured by an ordinal scale (1-5).
We enrolled 124 subjects; 120 completed all outcome measures. Of these, 59 underwent randomization to US studies with room-temperature gel and 61 underwent randomization to heated US gel. Patient 100-mm VAS satisfaction scores were 83.9 among patients undergoing studies with room-temperature gel versus 87.6 among subjects undergoing studies with heated gel (effect size 3.7, 95% confidence interval -1.3-8.6). There were similarly no differences between the two arms with regard to patient perceptions of sonographer professionalism.
The use of heated ultrasound gel appears to have no material impact on the satisfaction of ED patients undergoing bedside ultrasound studies.
我们的目标是确定与室温凝胶相比,急诊科(ED)床边超声检查使用加热凝胶是否能提高患者满意度。
我们将由主治医生确定需要进行床边超声(US)检查的急诊科患者便利样本随机分为使用加热凝胶(102.0°F)组或室温凝胶(82.3°F)组。研究者进行所有的超声检查。我们告知所有受试者该研究涉及调查各种提高患者对急诊科超声检查满意度的措施,但未告知他们我们特别关注凝胶温度。研究者在进行检查时戴耐热手套,以使他们对凝胶温度不知情。超声检查完成后,受试者完成一项调查,包括以100毫米视觉模拟量表(VAS)测量的患者满意度主要结局指标。次要结局是通过有序量表(1 - 5)测量的患者对超声检查人员专业素养的看法。
我们纳入了124名受试者;120名完成了所有结局指标。其中,59名被随机分配接受室温凝胶超声检查,61名被随机分配接受加热凝胶超声检查。接受室温凝胶检查的患者100毫米VAS满意度得分为83.9,而接受加热凝胶检查的受试者得分为87.6(效应量3.7,95%置信区间 -1.3 - 8.6)。在患者对超声检查人员专业素养的看法方面,两组之间同样没有差异。
使用加热超声凝胶似乎对接受床边超声检查的急诊科患者的满意度没有实质性影响。