Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T15:00:47.684Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

FAST Performance in a Stationary versus In-Motion Military Ambulance Utilizing Handheld Ultrasound: A Randomized Controlled Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 August 2020

Cecil J. Simmons ,
Lisa D. Mack ,
Aaron J. Cronin ,
Jonathan D. Monti ,
Michael D. Perreault  and
Brian J. Ahern Open the ORCID record for Brian J. Ahern [Opens in a new window]
Cecil J. Simmons
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Madigan Army Medical Center, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WashingtonUSA
Lisa D. Mack
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Madigan Army Medical Center, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WashingtonUSA
Aaron J. Cronin
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Madigan Army Medical Center, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WashingtonUSA
Jonathan D. Monti
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Investigation, Madigan Army Medical Center, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WashingtonUSA
Michael D. Perreault
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Madigan Army Medical Center, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WashingtonUSA
Brian J. Ahern*
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Madigan Army Medical Center, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WashingtonUSA
*
Correspondence: Brian J. Ahern, PA-C, DSc, Department of Emergency Medicine, Madigan Army Medical Center, 9040 Jackson Avenue, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington, 98431USA, E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

On-scene prehospital conditions and patient instability may warrant a during-transport ultrasound (US) exam. The objective of this study was to assess the effect of ambulance turbulence on the performance of the Focused Assessment with Sonography in Trauma (FAST) with a handheld US device.

Methods:

This was a randomized controlled trial in which participants were randomized to perform a FAST in either a stationary or an in-motion military ambulance. Participants were physicians and physician assistants (PAs) with previous FAST training. All exams were performed on an US phantom model. The primary outcome was FAST completion time, reported as a mean, in seconds. Secondary outcomes included image acquisition score (range of 0-24, reported as a mean), diagnostic accuracy (reported as sensitivity and specificity), and a post-participation survey with five-item Likert-type scales.

Results:

Twenty-seven participants performed 27 FASTs, 14 in the stationary ambulance and 13 in the in-motion ambulance. All participants obtained the four requisite views of the FAST. A significant difference was detected in image acquisition scores in favor of the stationary ambulance group (19.4 versus 16.7 [95% CI for difference, 0.9-4.4]; P <.01). Significant differences in survey items between groups were related to obtaining and maintaining US images and the exam conditions. There was not a difference in FAST completion time between groups (98.5 seconds versus 78.7 seconds [95% CI for difference, -13.5 seconds to 53.1 seconds]; P = .23). Sensitivity and specificity of FAST in the stationary ambulance was 85.7% (95% CI, 67.3%-96.0%) and 96.4% (95% CI, 81.7%-99.9%) versus 96.2% (95% CI, 80.4%-99.9%) and 100.0% (95% CI, 86.8%-100.0%) in the in-motion ambulance group (P = .21).

Conclusion:

Vehicular motion did not affect FAST completion time and diagnostic accuracy; however, it did reduce FAST image acquisition scores. The results suggest timely and diagnostically accurate FASTs may be completed by experienced sonographers during moderate levels of ambulance turbulence. Further investigation assessing the utility and limitations of newer handheld US devices in various prehospital conditions is warranted.

Keywords

ambulanceFASTmilitary medicineprehospitalultrasound
Type
Original Research
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 35 , Issue 6 , December 2020 , pp. 632 - 637
Check for updates
Copyright
© World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Richards, JR, McGahan, JP. Focused Assessment with Sonography in Trauma (FAST) in 2017: what radiologists can learn. Radiology. 2017;283(1):30–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quinn, AC, Sinert, R. What is the utility of the Focused Assessment with Sonography in Trauma (FAST) exam in penetrating torso trauma? Injury. 2011;42(5):482–487.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, IM, Naumann, DN, Marsden, MER, Ballard, M, Bowley, DM. Scanning and war: utility of FAST and CT in the assessment of battlefield abdominal trauma. Ann Surg. 2015;262(2):389–396.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scharonow, M, Weilbach, C. Prehospital point-of-care emergency ultrasound: a cohort study. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2018;26(1):49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beck-Razi, N, Fischer, D, Michaelson, M, Engel, A, Gaitini, D. The utility of Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma as a triage tool in multiple-casualty incidents during the second Lebanon war. J Ultrasound Med. 26(9):1149–1156.Google Scholar
USFA. Fire/Emergency Medical Services Department Operational Considerations and Guide for Active Shooter and Mass Casualty Incidents. September 2013. https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/active_shooter_guide.pdf. Accessed March 21, 2020.Google Scholar
NAEMT. TCCC Guidelines for Medical Personal. August 1, 2019. https://www.naemt.org/docs/default-source/education-documents/tccc/tccc-mp-updates-190801/tccc-guidelines-for-medical-personnel-190801.pdf?sfvrsn=cc99d692_2. Accessed March 21, 2020.Google Scholar
Tactical Emergency Casualty Care (TECC) Guidelines. June 2015. http://www.c-tecc.org/images/content/TECC_Guidelines_-_JUNE_2015_update.pdf. Accessed March 21, 2020.Google Scholar
Wandling, MW, Nathens, AB, Shapiro, MB, Haut, ER. Association of prehospital mode of transport with mortality in penetrating trauma: a trauma system–level assessment of private vehicle transportation vs ground Emergency Medical Services. JAMA Surg. 2018;153(2):107.Google ScholarPubMed
Band, RA, Salhi, RA, Holena, DN, Powell, E, Branas, CC, Carr, BG. Severity-adjusted mortality in trauma patients transported by police. Ann Emerg Med. 2014;63(5):608–614.e3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ketelaars, R, Reijnders, G, van Geffen, G-J, Scheffer, GJ, Hoogerwerf, N. ABCDE of prehospital ultrasonography: a narrative review. Crit Ultrasound J. 2018;10(1):17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brun, P-M, Bessereau, J, Chenaitia, H, et al. Stay and play eFAST or scoop and run eFAST? That is the question! Am J Emerg Med. 2014;32(2):166–170.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Busch, M. Portable ultrasound in pre-hospital emergencies: a feasibility study. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica. 2006;50(6):754–758.Google ScholarPubMed
SonoSite. SonoSite iViz. https://www.sonosite.com/products/sonosite-iviz. Accessed February 9, 2020.Google Scholar
Philips Lumify. Philips. Handheld, portable ultrasound machine. https://www.usa.philips.com/healthcare/resources/landing/lumify-exceptional-imaging. Accessed February 9, 2020.Google Scholar
Clarius Mobile Health. Technology Overview. Clarius Portable Ultrasound Scanner. https://clarius.com/about/technology/. Accessed February 9, 2020.Google Scholar
Ziesmann, MT, Park, J, Unger, BJ, et al. Validation of the quality of ultrasound imaging and competence (QUICk) score as an objective assessment tool for the FAST examination. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2015;78(5):1008–1013.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walcher, F, Weinlich, M, Conrad, G, et al. Prehospital ultrasound imaging improves management of abdominal trauma. Brit J Surg. 2006;93(2):238-242.Google ScholarPubMed
AIUM. Practice Parameters. https://www.aium.org/resources/guidelines.aspx. Accessed February 15, 2020.Google Scholar
Savatmongkorngul, S, Wongwaisayawan, S, Kaewlai, R. Focused assessment with sonography for trauma: current perspectives. Open Access Emerg Med. 2017;9:57–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yates, JG, Baylous, D. Aeromedical ultrasound: the evaluation of point-of-care ultrasound during helicopter transport. Air Med J. 2017;36(3):110–115.Google ScholarPubMed
Kirkpatrick, AW, Breeck, K, Wong, J, et al. The potential of handheld trauma sonography in the air medical transport of the trauma victim. Air Med J. 2005;24(1):34–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O’Dochartaigh, D, Douma, M, MacKenzie, M. Five-year retrospective review of physician and non-physician performed ultrasound in a Canadian critical care helicopter Emergency Medical Service. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2017;21(1):24–31.Google Scholar
Ultrasound Guidelines: Emergency, point-of-care and clinical ultrasound guidelines in medicine. Ann Emerg Med. 2017;69(5):e27–e54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahern, BJ, Monti, JD, Naylor, JF, Cronin, AJ, Perreault, MD. US Army combat medic eFAST performance with a novel versus conventional transducers: a randomized, crossover trial. Mil Med. 2020;185(Supplement_1):19–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Monti, JD, Perreault, MD. Impact of a 4-hour introductory eFAST training intervention among ultrasound-naïve US Military medics. Mil Med. 2020;185(5-6):e601–e608.Google Scholar
Kim, CH, Shin, SD, Song, KJ, Park, CB. Diagnostic accuracy of Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST) examinations performed by emergency medical technicians. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2012;16(3):400–406.Google ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Simmons et al. supplementary material

Appendix A

Download Simmons et al. supplementary material(File)
File 694.5 KB