AEM Early Access 22: Test Characteristics of Point of Care Ultrasound for the Diagnosis of Retinal Detachment in the Emergency Department

Welcome to the twenty-second episode of AEM Early Access, a FOAMed podcast collaboration between the Academic Emergency Medicine Journal and Brown Emergency Medicine. Each month, we'll give you digital open access to an recent AEM Article or Article in Press, with an author interview podcast and suggested supportive educational materials for EM learners.

Find this podcast series on iTunes here.

AEM+Podcasts+logo[3].png

DISCUSSING (CLICK ON LINK FOR FULL TEXT, OPEN ACCESS THROUGH January 31):

Test Characteristics of Point of Care Ultrasound for the Diagnosis of Retinal Detachment in the Emergency Department. Daniel J. Kim, MD,  Mario Francispragasam, MEd, MD, Gavin Docherty, MD, Byron Silver, MSc, MD, Ross Prager, BSc, Donna Lee, MD, RDMS, and David Maberley, MSc, MD. 

LISTEN NOW: FIRST AUTHOR INTERVIEW WITH Daniel J. Kim, MD

Profile Shot [Daniel Kim].jpg

Daniel J. Kim, MD

Department of Emergency Medicine

Vancouver General Hospital

Director, Ultrasound Fellowship Program

University of British Columbia

@dan___kim

ABSTRACT

Previous studies of point of care ultrasound (POCUS) have reported high sensitivities and specificities for retinal detachment (RD). Our primary objective was to assess the test characteristics of POCUS performed by a large heterogeneous group of emergency physicians (EPs) for the diagnosis of RD.

Methods: This was a prospective diagnostic test assessment of POCUS performed by EPs with varying ultrasound experience on a convenience sample of emergency department (ED) patients presenting with flashes or floaters in one or both eyes. After standard ED assessment, EPs performed an ocular POCUS scan targeted to detect the presence or absence of RD. After completing their ED visit, all patients were assessed by a retina specialist who was blinded to the results of the POCUS scan. We calculated sensitivity and specificity with associated exact binomial confidence intervals (CI) using the retina specialist's final diagnosis as the reference standard.

Results: A total of 30 EPs enrolled 115 patients, with median age of 60 years and 64% female. The retina specialist diagnosed RD in 16 (14%) cases. The sensitivity and specificity of POCUS for detecting RD was 75% (95% CI 48%-93%) and 94% (95% CI 87%-98%), respectively. The positive likelihood ratio was 12.4 (95% CI 5.4-28.3), and negative likelihood ratio was 0.27 (95% CI 0.11-0.62).

Conclusions: A large heterogeneous group of EPs can perform POCUS with high specificity but only intermediate sensitivity for RD. A negative POCUS scan in the ED performed by a heterogeneous group of providers after a one-hour POCUS didactic is not sufficiently sensitive to rule out RD in a patient with new onset flashes or floaters. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

ADDITIONAL RELATED READING

Vrablik et al, 2015. The diagnostic accuracy of bedside ocular ultrasonography for the diagnosis of retinal detachment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24680547

Jacobsen et al, 2016. Retrospective Review of Ocular Point-of-Care Ultrasound for Detection of Retinal Detachment: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26973752

Baker et al, 2017. Can emergency physicians accurately distinguish retinal detachment from posterior vitreous detachment with point-of-care ocular ultrasound?: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29042095

AEM Commentary on this paper: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30112843

Other commentaries on this paper:

NEJM Journal Watch: https://www.jwatch.org/na46896/2018/06/11/dont-try-rule-out-retinal-detachment-with-poc-ultrasound

UC San Diego Ultrasound Division: http://emultrasound.sdsc.edu/index.php/2018/07/25/retinal-detachment/

How Do You Use a Schiotz Tonometer?

Video by Scott Pasichow; Text by Joseph Moran

Case intro:

A 40-year-old patient with a history of migraine and glaucoma presented to the ED with concern of acute frontal headache with visual changes. The patient was well-appearing without acutely concerning neurologic or ophthalmologic findings on physical exam. As part of his workup, an intraocular pressure was desired to rule out increased IOP/glaucoma. An electronic tonometer was unavailable for use. Instead, the Schiotz tonometer was utilized. 

A Schiotz tonometer is an analog, weight-based tool to assess intraocular pressure. It uses a weight on a flat transducer which is opposed by the intraocular pressure. The IOP is transferred through the weighted tonometer arm and gives a reading on a needle, which is then used on a conversion table to calculate IOP.

Case contents:

Tonometer, 7.5, 10, and 15 gram weights, conversion table.

Steps of use:

  1. Anesthetize eye

  2. Apply one of the 3 included weights to the Schiotz tonometer as demonstrated in the video. Start at 5.5 and change to heavier as needed if reading is too high (e.g., off the charts)

  3. Have the patient look straight ahead while lying supine

  4. Apply the flat round bottom of the tonometer to the middle of the cornea (e.g., mid-pupil)

  5. Write down (or remember) the reading on the needle

  6. Use conversion table based on weight used and needle reading to calculate IOP

  7. Clean with alcohol swab

Case conclusion:

The patient's IOP was within normal limits, symptoms improved with symptomatic care, and the patient was discharged home with outpatient follow up and return precautions.

Faculty Reviewer: Dr. Whit Fisher

AEM Education and Training 09: Looking Through the Prism - Caring for LGBTQI Patients in the ED

Welcome to the ninth episode of AEM Education and Training, a podcast collaboration between the Academic Emergency Medicine E&T Journal and Brown Emergency Medicine. Each quarter, we'll give you digital open access to AEM E&T Articles or Articles in Press, with an author interview podcast and links to curated supportive educational materials for EM learners and medical educators.

Find this podcast series on iTunes here.

AEM E and T Podcasts logo[1].png

DISCUSSING (CLICK ON TITLE TO ACCESS):

Looking Through the Prism: Comprehensive Care of Sexual Minority and Gender‐nonconforming Patients in the Acute Care Setting. Angela F. Jarman MD, MPH; Alyson J. McGregor MD, MA; Joel L. Moll MD ; Tracy E. Madsen MD, ScM; Elizabeth A. Samuels MD, MPH; Mollie Chesis; Bruce M. Becker MD.

LISTEN NOW: AUTHOR INTERVIEW WITH angela jarman, MD, Mph

Jarman Headshot.jpg

Angela Jarman, MD, MPH

Assistant Professor, Department of Emergency Medicine

University of California, Davis

This interview discusses a commentary in AEM E&T which synthesizes a didactic session co‐led by the SAEM Sex and Gender in Emergency Medicine Interest Group and the Academy for Diversity and Inclusion, which was presented by the authors at the SAEM 2018 annual meeting in Indianapolis, Indiana.

The National Institutes of Health have recently recognized LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer) as an official health disparity and designated the Sexual and Gender Minority Research Office in an effort to support evidence‐based medical care for this underserved patient population. As the front line of medical care for the underserved, emergency medicine (EM) physicians need to be equipped with the tools to care for these patients in a culturally competent and clinically appropriate manner. EM providers must develop an understanding of their patients’ social and medical context to provide both sensitive and effective care and to teach residents and other learners. A significant number of patients who seek treatment in the emergency department define themselves as LGBTQI—lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex. This commentary combines both affective and objective information on the importance of semantics and language, appropriate communication, and confronting our own implicit biases in caring for this vulnerable population, creating a unique perspective and paradigm for the practice of EM and a blueprint for education. 

The authors have provided this handout for further information:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WDyk0HcCCP3DKmgGRdom53s8LKZB5Znz/view?usp=sharing

Excerpt:

Screen Shot 2018-12-05 at 12.38.01 PM.png


ADDITIONAL REFERENCES:

“Don’t be a jerk” EM Pulse Podcast, Episode 9. https://ucdavisem.com/2018/07/17/dont-be-a-jerk/

http://www.transstudent.org/gender/

NIH ORWH sex/gender. Available at https://orwh.od.nih.gov/research/sex-gender.

Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Health Issues and Research Gaps and Opportunities. The health of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people. National Academies Press (US), Washington, DC; 2011

Clayton JA, Tannenbaum C. Reporting Sex, Gender, or Both in Clinical Research? JAMA 2016; 316(18):1863-1864

Madsen TE, Bourjeily G, Hasnain M, Jenkins MJ, Morrison MF, Sandberg K, Tong IL, Trott J. Sex- and Gender-Based Medicine: The Need for Precise Terminology. Gender and the Genome;1(3):122-28.

Schuster MA, Reisner SL, Onorato SE. Beyond bathrooms — meeting the health needs of transgender people. NEJM 2016;375:101–103.

Soc Sci Med. 2014 Feb;103:33-41. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.06.005. Epub 2013 Jun 18.

Structural stigma and all-cause mortality in sexual minority populations. Soc Sci Med. 2014 Feb;103:33-41. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.06.005. Epub 2013 Jun 18.

The Health of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender People: Building a Foundation for Better Understanding Editors: Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Health Issues and Research Gaps and Opportunities.

Bauer GR, Scheim AI, Deutsch MB, et al. Reported Emergency Department Avoidance, Use, and Experiences of Transgender Persons in Ontario, Canada: Results From a Respondent-Driven Sampling Survey. Annals of Emergency Medicine. 2014;63(6):713-720.

Brown JF, Fu J. Emergency department avoidance by transgender persons: another broken thread in the "safety net" of emergency medicine care. Annals of Emergency Medicine. 2014;63(6):721-722.

Center of Excellence for Transgender Health, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of California San Francisco. Guidelines for the Primary and Gender-Affirming Care of Transgender and Gender Nonbinary People; 2nd edition. Deutsch MB, ed. June 2016. Available at www.transhealth.ucsf.edu/guidelines .

Chisolm-Straker M, Jardine L, Bennouna C, Morency-Brassard N, Coy L, Egemba MO, Shearer PL (2017) Transgender and gender nonconforming in emergency departments: a qualitative report of patient experiences, Transgender Health 2:1, 8-16, DOI: 10.1089/trgh.2016.0026.

Deutsch MB, Jamison Green, Keatley J, Mayer G, Hastings J, Hall AM. Electronic medical records and the transgender patient: recommendations from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013;20:700-703

IOM. Collecting sexual orientation and gender identity data in electronic health records: Workshop summary. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine;2013.

James SE, Herman JL, Rankin S, et al. The Report of the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey. Washington, DC: National Center for Transgender Equality;2016.

Jalali S, Sauer LM. Improving Care for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Patients in the Emergency Department. Annals of Emergency Medicine. 2015;66(4):417-423.

Lambda legal. Creating equal access to quality health care for transgender patients: transgender-affirming hospital policies. May 2016. Http://assets.Hrc.Org//files/assets/resources/transaffirming-hospitalpolicies-2016.Pdf?_Ga=2.179968679.225917522.1494296888-1373396650.1480810731

Samuels EA, Tape C, Garber N, Bowman S, Choo EK. “Sometimes you feel like the freak show”: A Qualitative Assessment of Emergency Care Experiences Among Trans and Gender Non-Conforming Patients. Ann Emerg Med 2017: doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2017.05.002.

World Professional Association for Transgender Health, Standards of Care for the Health of Transexual, Transgender, and Gender Nonconforming People 5 (7th ed.), http://www.wpath.org/uploaded_ les/140/ les/Stan- dards%20of%20Care,%20V7%20Full%20Book.pdf