Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35698007›Full record

ArticleThe ultrasound journal2022

Prehospital portable ultrasound for safe and accurate prehospital needle thoracostomy: a pilot educational study.

Zachary E Dewar, Stephanie Ko, Cameron Rogers, Alexis Oropallo, Andrew Augustine, Ankitha Pamula, Christopher L Berry

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The ultrasound journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Zachary E DewarDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Guthrie Robert Packer Hospital, One Guthrie Square, Sayre, PA, 18840, USA. zachary.dewar@guthrie.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4697-7023
Stephanie KoDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Guthrie Robert Packer Hospital, One Guthrie Square, Sayre, PA, 18840, USA.
Cameron RogersGreater Valley EMS, 904 North Lehigh Ave, Sayre, PA, 18840, USA.
Alexis OropalloDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Guthrie Robert Packer Hospital, One Guthrie Square, Sayre, PA, 18840, USA.
Andrew AugustineDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Guthrie Robert Packer Hospital, One Guthrie Square, Sayre, PA, 18840, USA.
Ankitha PamulaDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Guthrie Robert Packer Hospital, One Guthrie Square, Sayre, PA, 18840, USA.
Christopher L BerryDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Guthrie Robert Packer Hospital, One Guthrie Square, Sayre, PA, 18840, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1033-8537
SUNY Upstate Medical University · USLehigh Valley Hospital-Pocono · USWilkes University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSimulated needle thoracostomy (NT) using ultrasound may reduce potential injury, increase accuracy, and be as rapid to perform as the traditional landmark technique following a brief educational session. Our objective was to determine if the use of an educational session demonstrating the use of handheld ultrasound to Emergency Medical Services (EMS) staff to facilitate NT was both feasible, and an effective way of increasing the safety and efficacy of this procedure for rural EMS providers.

methodsA pre/post-educational intervention on a convenience sample of rural North American EMS paramedics and nurses. Measurement of location and estimated depth of placement of needle thoracostomy with traditional landmark technique was completed and then repeated using handheld ultrasound following a training session on thoracic ultrasound and correct placement of NT.

resultsA total of 30 EMS practitioners participated. Seven were female (23.3%). There was a higher frequency of dangerous structures underlying the chosen location with the landmark technique 9/60 (15%) compared to the ultrasound technique 1/60 (1.7%) (p = 0.08). Mean time-to-site-selection for the landmark technique was shorter than the ultrasound technique at 10.7 s (range 3.35-45 s) vs. 19.9 s (range 7.8-50 s), respectively (p < 0.001). There was a lower proportion of correct location selection for the landmark technique 40/60 (66.7%) when compared to the ultrasound technique 51/60 (85%) (p = 0.019). With ultrasound, there was less variance between the estimated and measured depth of the pleural space with a mean difference of 0.033 cm (range 0-0.5 cm) when ultrasound was used as compared to a mean difference of 1.0375 cm (range 0-6 cm) for the landmark technique (95% CI for the difference 0.73-1.27 cm; p < 0.001).

conclusionsTeaching ultrasound NT was feasible in our cohort. While time-to-site-selection for ultrasound-guided NT took longer than the landmark technique, it increased safe and accurate simulated NT placement with fewer identified potential iatrogenic injuries.

Indexed as

Emergency medical servicesNeedle decompressionNeedle thoracostomyPneumothoraxPOCUSPoint-of-care ultrasoundTension pneumothoraxTrauma

Identifiers

PMID35698007
PMCPMC9191400
OpenAlexW4282589364

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.