Unravelling the skillset of point-of-care ultrasound:a systematic review

Background: The increasing number of physicians that are trained in point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) warrants critical evaluation and improvement of current training methods. Performing POCUS is a complex task and it is unknown which (neuro)cognitive mechanisms are most important in competence development of this skill. This systematic review was conducted to identify determinants of POCUS competence development that can be used to optimize POCUS training. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Emcare, PsycINFO and ERIC databases were searched for studies measuring ultrasound (US) skills and aptitude. The papers were divided into three categories: “Relevant knowledge”, “Psychomotor ability” and ‘Visuospatial ability’. The ‘Relevant knowledge’ category was further subdivided in ‘image interpretation’, ‘technical aspects’ and ‘general cognitive abilities’. Visuospatial ability was subdivided in visuospatial subcategories based on the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Model of Intelligence v2.2, which includes visuospatial manipulation and visuospatial perception. Post-hoc, a meta-analysis was performed to calculate pooled correlations. Results: 26 papers were selected for inclusion in the review. 15 reported on relevant knowledge with a pooled coefficient of determination of 0.26. Four papers reported on psychomotor abilities, one reported a significant relationship with POCUS competence. 13 papers reported on visuospatial abilities, the pooled coefficient of determination was 0.16.Conclusion: There was a lot of heterogeneity in methods to assess possible determinants of POCUS competence and POCUS competence acquisition. This makes it difficult to draw strong conclusions on which determinants should be part of a framework to improve POCUS education. However, we identified two determinants of POCUS competence development: relevant knowledge and visuospatial ability. The content of relevant knowledge could not be retrieved in more depth. For visuospatial ability we used the CHC model as theoretical framework to analyze this skill. We could not point out psychomotor ability as a determinant of POCUS competence.</p

Unravelling the skillset of point-of-care ultrasound:a systematic review

Background: The increasing number of physicians that are trained in point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) warrants critical evaluation and improvement of current training methods. Performing POCUS is a complex task and it is unknown which (neuro)cognitive mechanisms are most important in competence development of this skill. This systematic review was conducted to identify determinants of POCUS competence development that can be used to optimize POCUS training. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Emcare, PsycINFO and ERIC databases were searched for studies measuring ultrasound (US) skills and aptitude. The papers were divided into three categories: “Relevant knowledge”, “Psychomotor ability” and ‘Visuospatial ability’. The ‘Relevant knowledge’ category was further subdivided in ‘image interpretation’, ‘technical aspects’ and ‘general cognitive abilities’. Visuospatial ability was subdivided in visuospatial subcategories based on the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Model of Intelligence v2.2, which includes visuospatial manipulation and visuospatial perception. Post-hoc, a meta-analysis was performed to calculate pooled correlations. Results: 26 papers were selected for inclusion in the review. 15 reported on relevant knowledge with a pooled coefficient of determination of 0.26. Four papers reported on psychomotor abilities, one reported a significant relationship with POCUS competence. 13 papers reported on visuospatial abilities, the pooled coefficient of determination was 0.16.Conclusion: There was a lot of heterogeneity in methods to assess possible determinants of POCUS competence and POCUS competence acquisition. This makes it difficult to draw strong conclusions on which determinants should be part of a framework to improve POCUS education. However, we identified two determinants of POCUS competence development: relevant knowledge and visuospatial ability. The content of relevant knowledge could not be retrieved in more depth. For visuospatial ability we used the CHC model as theoretical framework to analyze this skill. We could not point out psychomotor ability as a determinant of POCUS competence.</p

Therapeutic anticoagulation for splanchnic vein thrombosis in acute pancreatitis:A national survey and case-vignette study

BACKGROUND: Splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) is a major complication of moderate and severe acute pancreatitis. There is no consensus on whether therapeutic anticoagulation should be started in patients with acute pancreatitis and SVT. AIM: To gain insight into current opinions and clinical decision making of pancreatologists regarding SVT in acute pancreatitis. METHODS: A total of 139 pancreatologists of the Dutch Pancreatitis Study Group and Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group were approached to complete an online survey and case vignette survey. The threshold to assume group agreement was set at 75%. RESULTS: The response rate was 67% (n = 93). Seventy-one pancreatologists (77%) regularly prescribed therapeutic anticoagulation in case of SVT, and 12 pancreatologists (13%) for narrowing of splanchnic vein lumen. The most common reason to treat SVT was to avoid complications (87%). Acute thrombosis was the most important factor to prescribe therapeutic anticoagulation (90%). Portal vein thrombosis was chosen as the most preferred location to initiate therapeutic anticoagulation (76%) and splenic vein thrombosis as the least preferred location (86%). The preferred initial agent was low molecular weight heparin (LMWH; 87%). In the case vignettes, therapeutic anticoagulation was prescribed for acute portal vein thrombosis, with or without suspected infected necrosis (82% and 90%), and thrombus progression (88%). Agreement was lacking regarding the selection and duration of long-term anticoagulation, the indication for thrombophilia testing and upper endoscopy, and about whether risk of bleeding is a major barrier for therapeutic anticoagulation. CONCLUSION: In this national survey, the pancreatologists seemed to agree on the use of therapeutic anticoagulation, using LMWH in the acute phase, for acute portal thrombosis and in the case of thrombus progression, irrespective of the presence of infected necrosis.</p

Splanchnic vein thrombosis in necrotizing pancreatitis:a post-hoc analysis of a nationwide prospective cohort

Background: Treatment guidelines for splanchnic vein thrombosis in necrotizing pancreatitis are lacking due to insufficient data on the full clinical spectrum. Methods: We performed a post-hoc analysis of a nationwide prospective necrotizing pancreatitis cohort. Multivariable analyses were used to identify risk factors and compare the clinical course of patients with and without SVT. Results: SVT was detected in 97 of the 432 included patients (22%) (median onset: 4 days). Risk factors were left, central, or subtotal necrosis (OR 28.52; 95% CI 20.11–40.45), right or diffuse necrosis (OR 5.76; 95% CI 3.89–8.51), and younger age (OR 0.94; 95% CI 0.90–0.97). Patients with SVT had higher rates of bleeding (n = 10,11%) and bowel ischemia (n = 4,4%) compared to patients without SVT (n = 14,4% and n = 2,0.6%; OR 3.24; 95% CI 1.27–8.23 and OR 7.29; 95% CI 1.31–40.4, respectively), and were independently associated with ICU admission (adjusted OR 2.53; 95% CI 1.37–4.68). Spontaneous recanalization occurred in 62% of patients (n = 40/71). Radiological and clinical outcomes did not differ between patients treated with and without anticoagulants. Discussion: SVT is a common and early complication of necrotizing pancreatitis, associated with parenchymal necrosis and younger age. SVT is associated with increased complications and a worse clinical course, whereas anticoagulant use does not appear to affect outcomes.</p

Splanchnic vein thrombosis in necrotizing pancreatitis:a post-hoc analysis of a nationwide prospective cohort

Background: Treatment guidelines for splanchnic vein thrombosis in necrotizing pancreatitis are lacking due to insufficient data on the full clinical spectrum. Methods: We performed a post-hoc analysis of a nationwide prospective necrotizing pancreatitis cohort. Multivariable analyses were used to identify risk factors and compare the clinical course of patients with and without SVT. Results: SVT was detected in 97 of the 432 included patients (22%) (median onset: 4 days). Risk factors were left, central, or subtotal necrosis (OR 28.52; 95% CI 20.11–40.45), right or diffuse necrosis (OR 5.76; 95% CI 3.89–8.51), and younger age (OR 0.94; 95% CI 0.90–0.97). Patients with SVT had higher rates of bleeding (n = 10,11%) and bowel ischemia (n = 4,4%) compared to patients without SVT (n = 14,4% and n = 2,0.6%; OR 3.24; 95% CI 1.27–8.23 and OR 7.29; 95% CI 1.31–40.4, respectively), and were independently associated with ICU admission (adjusted OR 2.53; 95% CI 1.37–4.68). Spontaneous recanalization occurred in 62% of patients (n = 40/71). Radiological and clinical outcomes did not differ between patients treated with and without anticoagulants. Discussion: SVT is a common and early complication of necrotizing pancreatitis, associated with parenchymal necrosis and younger age. SVT is associated with increased complications and a worse clinical course, whereas anticoagulant use does not appear to affect outcomes.</p

Therapeutic anticoagulation for splanchnic vein thrombosis in acute pancreatitis: A national survey and case-vignette study

BACKGROUND Splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) is a major complication of moderate and severe acute pancreatitis. There is no consensus on whether therapeutic anticoagulation should be started in patients with acute pancreatitis and SVT. AIM To gain insight into current opinions and clinical decision making of pancreatologists regarding SVT in acute pancreatitis. METHODS A total of 139 pancreatologists of the Dutch Pancreatitis Study Group and Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group were approached to complete an online survey and case vignette survey. The threshold to assume group agreement was set at 75%. RESULTS The response rate was 67% (n = 93). Seventy-one pancreatologists (77%) regularly prescribed therapeutic anticoagulation in case of SVT, and 12 pancreatologists (13%) for narrowing of splanchnic vein lumen. The most common reason to treat SVT was to avoid complications (87%). Acute thrombosis was the most important factor to prescribe therapeutic anticoagulation (90%). Portal vein thrombosis was chosen as the most preferred location to initiate therapeutic anticoagulation (76%) and splenic vein thrombosis as the least preferred location (86%). The preferred initial agent was low molecular weight heparin (LMWH; 87%). In the case vignettes, therapeutic anticoagulation was prescribed for acute portal vein thrombosis, with or without suspected infected necrosis (82% and 90%), and thrombus progression (88%). Agreement was lacking regarding the selection and duration of long-term anticoagulation, the indication for thrombophilia testing and upper endoscopy, and about whether risk of bleeding is a major barrier for therapeutic anticoagulation. CONCLUSION In this national survey, the pancreatologists seemed to agree on the use of therapeutic anticoagulation, using LMWH in the acute phase, for acute portal thrombosis and in the case of thrombus progression, irrespective of the presence of infected necrosis