Point-of-care ultrasound curriculum for internal medicine residents:what do you desire? A national survey

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care Ultrasound is a relative new diagnostic tool for internists. Since 2019, it is a mandatory skill for internal medicine residents in the Netherlands but an ultrasound curriculum still has to be developed. In this study we explored the current ultrasound training program and educational wishes from internal medicine residents. METHODS: We have undertaken a national study in March 2019 using an online questionnaire. All internal medicine residents in the Netherlands were invited to respond. RESULTS: A total of 247 from 959 (26%) residents completed the questionnaire. The majority of residents (78.6%) received less than 10 h of ultrasound training and 40% has never made an ultrasound at all. Almost all residents (92%) indicate that ultrasound is a useful skill for the internist. They report that the most useful applications are ultrasound of the inferior vena cava, kidneys, abdominal free fluid, deep vein thrombosis, heart and lungs. The main perceived barrier to perform ultrasound is the lack of availability of experts for bedside supervision. CONCLUSION: This study confirms the need for a national ultrasound curriculum for internal medicine residents and may contribute to the development of an ultrasound curriculum in line with residents educational needs. We should begin the curriculum with the previously mentioned applications, perceived by internal residents as most useful. Additional applications can be appended in the future. Finally it is necessary to expand the number of experts to supervise the residents

Life after a point-of-care ultrasound course:setting up the right conditions!

Background: Point-of-care Ultrasound (POCUS) is becoming an important diagnostic tool for internal medicine and ultrasound educational programs are being developed. An ultrasound course is often included in such a curriculum. We have performed a prospective observational questionnaire-based cohort study consisting of participants of a POCUS course for internal medicine in the Netherlands in a 2-year period. We investigated the usefulness of an ultrasound course and barriers participants encountered after the course. Results: 55 participants (49%) completed the pre-course questionnaire, 29 (26%) completed the post-course questionnaire, 11 participants (10%) finalized the third questionnaire. The number of participants who performs POCUS was almost doubled after the course (from 34.5 to 65.5%). Almost all participants felt insufficiently skilled before the course which declined to 34.4% after the course. The majority (N = 26 [89.7%]) stated that this 2-day ultrasound course was sufficient enough to perform POCUS in daily practice but also changed daily practice. The most important barriers withholding them from performing ultrasound are lack of experts for supervision, insufficient practice time and absence of an ultrasound machine. Conclusions: This study shows that a 2-day hands-on ultrasound course seems a sufficient first step in an ultrasound curriculum for internal medicine physicians to obtain enough knowledge and skills to perform POCUS in clinical practice but it also changes clinical practice. However, there are barriers in the transfer to clinical practice that should be addressed which may improve curriculum designing

Pain score, desire for pain treatment and effect on pain satisfaction in the emergency department:a prospective, observational study

Background: Pain management in the Emergency Department has often been described as inadequate, despite proven benefits of pain treatment protocols. The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of our current pain protocol on pain score and patient satisfaction whilst taking the patients' wishes for analgesia into account. Methods: We conducted a 10-day prospective observational study in the Emergency Department. Demographics, pain characteristics, Numeric Rating Scale pain scores and the desire for analgesics were noted upon arrival at the Emergency Department. A second Numeric Rating Scale pain score and the level of patient satisfaction were noted 75-90 min after receiving analgesics. Student T-tests, Mann-Whitney U tests and Kruskall-Wallis tests were used to compare outcomes between patients desiring vs. not desiring analgesics or patients receiving vs. not receiving analgesics. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to investigate associations between potential predictors and outcomes. Results: In this study 334 patients in pain were enrolled, of which 43.7% desired analgesics. Initial pain score was the only significant predictive factor for desiring analgesia, and differed between patients desiring (7.01) and not desiring analgesics (5.14). Patients receiving analgesics (52.1%) had a greater decrease in pain score than patients who did not receive analgesics (2.41 vs. 0.94). Within the group that did not receive analgesics there was no difference in satisfaction score between patients desiring and not desiring analgesics (7.48 vs. 7.54). Patients receiving analgesics expressed a higher satisfaction score than patients not receiving analgesics (8.10 vs. 7.53). Conclusions: This study pointed out that more than half of the patients in pain entering the Emergency Department did not desire analgesics. In patients receiving analgesics, our pain protocol has shown to adequately treat pain, leading to a higher satisfaction for emergency health-care at discharge. This study emphasizes the importance of questioning pain score and desire for analgesics to prevent incorrect conclusions of inadequate pain management, as described in previous studies

Managing intoxications with nicotine-containing e-liquids

INTRODUCTION: Nicotine is an addictive and poisonous agent. The recent development of e-cigarettes has caused a new demand for highly concentrated nicotine-containing solutions. These concentrated nicotine solutions have also increased the risk of nicotine overdoses. AREAS COVERED: Essential factors for nicotine exposure are the concentration of the nicotine-containing e-liquid solution and its pharmacokinetics. Liquid nicotine refills contain nicotine in varying concentrations, which vary widely between and within products. The pharmacokinetics of nicotine are dependent on the route of administration, renal/hepatic clearance and urinary pH. The dose is another essential determinant of nicotine exposure. There is a considerable discrepancy between the generally accepted lethal dose and symptoms reported in case studies. Ingested doses correlate poorly to clinical symptoms. Symptoms of liquid nicotine toxicity vary from mild to severe between patients and are the result of overstimulation of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, which may lead to fatal respiratory failure and cardiovascular collapse. EXPERT OPINION: The literature on nicotine-containing e-liquid intoxications originating from vaping device refills are mainly case reports. Based on these case reports, we propose a treatment plan which is primarily symptomatic. Research should focus on providing insight on its toxicity, based on oral and transdermal pharmacokinetics and on toxicodynamics

Influence of gender on the performance of urine dipstick and automated urinalysis in the diagnosis of urinary tract infections at the emergency department

BACKGROUND: Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are frequently encountered at the Emergency Department (ED). Given the anatomical differences between men and women, we aimed to clarify differences in the diagnostic performance of urinary parameters at the ED. METHODS: A cohort study of adults presenting at the ED with fever and/or clinical suspected UTI. Performance of urine dipstick (UD) and automated urinalysis (UF-1000i) were analysed for the total study population and men and women separately. We focused on 1) UTI diagnosis and 2) positive urine culture (UC, ≥105 CFU/ml) as outcome. RESULTS: In 360 of 917 cases (39.3%) UTI was established (men/women 35.1%/43.6%). Diagnostic accuracy of UD was around 10% lower in women compared to men. Median automated leucocyte and bacterial count were higher in women compared to men. Diagnostic performance by receiver operating analysis was 0.851 for leucocytes (men/women 0.879/0.817) and 0.850 for bacteria (men/women 0.898/0.791). At 90% sensitivity, cut-off values of leucocyte count (men 60/µL, women 43/µL), and bacterial count (men 75/µL, women 139/µL) showed performance differences in favour of men. In both men and women, diagnostic performance using specified cut-off values was not different between normal and non-normal bladder evacuation. UC was positive in 327 cases (men/women 149/178), as with UTI diagnosis, diagnostic values in men outperformed women. CONCLUSIONS: Overall diagnostic accuracy of urinary parameters for diagnosing UTI is higher in men. The described differences in cut-off values for leukocyte and bacterial counts for diagnosing UTI necessitates gender-specific cut-off values, probably reflecting the influence of anatomical and urogenital differences

Hospital-related costs of sepsis around the world:A systematic review exploring the economic burden of sepsis

Aim: The aim of this study was to examine the quality of manuscripts reporting sepsis health care costs and to provide an overview of hospital-related expenditures for sepsis in adult patients around the world. Methods: We systematically searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane and Google Scholar to identify relevant studies between January 2010 and January 2022. We selected articles that provided costs and cost-effectiveness analyses, defined sepsis and described their cost calculation method. All costs were adjusted to 2020 US dollars. Medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs) for various costs of sepsis were calculated. The quality of economic studies was assessed using the Drummond 10-item checklist. Results: Overall, 26 studies met our eligibility criteria. The mean total hospital costs per patient varied largely, between €1101 and €91,951. The median (IQR) of the total sepsis costs per country were €36,191 (€17,158 - €53,349), which equals €50 (€34 - €84) per capita annually. The relative amount of healthcare budget spent on sepsis was 2.65%, which equals 0.33% of the gross national product (GNP). Conclusion: While general sepsis costs are high, there is considerable variability between countries regarding the costs of sepsis. Further studies examining the impact on sepsis costs, especially on the general ward, can help justify, design and monitor initiatives on prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of this time-critical and potentially preventable disease

Use of sepsis-related diagnostic criteria in primary care:a survey among general practitioners

BACKGROUND: Use of sepsis-criteria in hospital settings is effective in realizing early recognition, adequate treatment and reduction of sepsis-associated morbidity and mortality. Whether general practitioners (GPs) use these diagnostic criteria is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To gauge the knowledge and use of various diagnostic criteria. To determine which parameters GPs associate with an increased likelihood of sepsis. METHODS: Two thousand five hundred and sixty GPs were invited and 229 agreed to participate in a survey, reached out to through e-mail and WhatsApp groups. The survey consisted of two parts: the first part aimed to obtain information about the GP, training and knowledge about sepsis recognition, and the second part tested specific knowledge using six realistic cases. RESULTS: Two hundred and six questionnaires, representing a response rate of 8.1%, were eligible for analysis. Gut feeling (98.1%) was the most used diagnostic method, while systemic inflammatory response syndrome (37.9%), quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) (7.8%) and UK Sepsis Trust criteria (UKSTc) (1.5%) were used by the minority of the GPs. Few of the responding GPs had heard of either the qSOFA (27.7%) or the UKSTc (11.7%). Recognition of sepsis varied greatly between GPs. GPs most strongly associated the individual signs of the qSOFA (mental status, systolic blood pressure, capillary refill time and respiratory rate) with diagnosing sepsis in the test cases. CONCLUSIONS: GPs mostly use gut feeling to diagnose sepsis and are frequently not familiar with the 'sepsis-criteria' used in hospital settings, although clinical reasoning was mostly in line with the qSOFA score. In order to improve sepsis recognition in primary care, GPs should be educated in the use of available screening tools