Emergency Medicine Resident-Driven Point of Care Ultrasound for Suspected Shoulder Dislocation

Woman With Shoulder Pain: Posterior Shoulder Dislocation Diagnosed With Point-of-Care Ultrasound

Posterior shoulder dislocations are relatively rare. When used by emergency medicine physicians, point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) demonstrates higher sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing shoulder dislocation as compared to two-view plain films. A 49-year-old woman presented to the emergency department (ED) with left shoulder pain following a mechanical fall. Physical examination was remarkable for a gross shoulder deformity and tenderness over the left proximal humerus. POCUS of the left shoulder using a curvilinear probe and a posterior approach was performed and demonstrated posterior displacement of the humeral head relative to the glenoid. Anteroposterior and oblique shoulder X-rays were read as unremarkable by the radiologist; a computed tomography of the shoulder confirmed a posterior shoulder dislocation. Given its efficacy and efficiency as compared to X-ray radiography, POCUS should be strongly considered in the diagnosis and management of posterior shoulder dislocations in the ED setting.

Is Ultrasound-guided or Landmark-guided Intra-articular Lidocaine Injection More Effective for Pain Control in Anterior Shoulder Dislocation Reduction? A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Effective pain control during reduction of shoulder dislocation is essential for patient comfort. However, there is a lack of comprehensive research comparing the efficacy of different pain management techniques, specifically landmark-guided and ultrasound-guided intra-articular analgesic injections.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

Among patients undergoing closed reduction of a shoulder dislocation, were there differences between an intra-articular shoulder injection placed using anatomic landmarks and an ultrasound-guided intra-articular injection in terms of (1) pain before versus after the injection and pain before injection versus after the reduction, or (2) length of stay in the emergency department and complications of the procedure?

METHODS

Between August 2021 and March 2023, 28 patients with anterior shoulder dislocation were treated at the emergency department of a tertiary referral care center. They were randomly assigned to either the landmark-guided or ultrasound-guided intra-articular lidocaine injection group. Differences in pain levels between preinjection and postinjection, preinjection and postreduction, length of hospital stay, and complications were assessed and compared between the two groups. Patients were followed for 2 weeks.

RESULTS

There were no between-group differences in terms of age, gender, baseline pain score, and any other relevant factors. There were no differences between the groups in terms of pain reduction between preinjection and postinjection (landmark-guided: ΔVAS 2.8 ± 1.1, ultrasound-guided: ΔVAS 2.9 ± 1.0, mean difference -0.14 [95% confidence interval -0.97 to 0.68]; p = 0.72) or between preinjection and postreduction (landmark-guided: ΔVAS 6.6 ± 2.1, ultrasound-guided: ΔVAS 5.8 ± 1.8, mean difference 0.79 [95% CI -0.74 to 2.31]; p = 0.30). There were no differences in length of stay in the emergency department (landmark-guided: 162 ± 38 minutes, ultrasound-guided: 184 ± 73 minutes, mean difference 22 minutes [95% CI -67 to 24]; p = 0.33), and no complications were reported in either group during the 2-week follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

The results of the landmark-guided technique were not different from those of ultrasound-guided injection in terms of lower pain levels, length of stay, and complications. These findings provide valuable guidance for orthopaedic surgeons, enabling them to make informed decisions based on their expertise and available resources.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, therapeutic study.

Rate of Successful Shoulder Reduction on First Confirmatory Imaging in the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Management of acute shoulder dislocation in the emergency department (ED) is common.

OBJECTIVE

This study describes the rate, risk factors, and length of stay (LOS) associated with shoulder dislocation reduction failure in the ED.

METHODS

The study was a retrospective case-control study of patients 18 years and older presenting to the ED with acute shoulder dislocation who underwent attempted reduction. Patients with successful reduction on post-reduction first confirmatory imaging are compared with those requiring multiple attempts.

RESULTS

Of 398 ED encounters when a shoulder reduction was attempted in the ED, 18.8% (75/398 [95% CI 15.2-22.9%]) required multiple reduction attempts. Patients with successful reduction on first confirmatory imaging were more commonly male (80.2% [95% CI 75.6-84.3%] vs. 68.0% [95% CI 56.8-77.8%]; p = 0.0220), discharged home from the ED (95.4% [95% CI 92.6-97.3%] vs. 84.0% [95% CI 74.4-91.0%]; p = 0.0004), reduced using a traction/countertraction technique (42.1% [95% CI 36.8-47.6%] vs. 29.3% [95% CI 19.9-40.4%]; p = 0.0415), and less likely to have a pre-reduction fracture (26.0% [95% CI 21.4-31.0%] vs. 45.3% [95% CI 34.4-56.7%]; p = 0.0010). Mean length of stay (LOS) for those with successful reduction on first confirmatory imaging was 2 hours and 8 minutes shorter than for those with more than one attempt (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of failed first-pass reduction is higher than previously reported. Furthermore, the ED LOS was significantly longer in patients requiring multiple attempts. Knowledge of the failure rate and risk factors may raise physician awareness and guide future studies evaluating approaches for verification of reduction success.

A consensus list of ultrasound competencies for graduating emergency medicine residents

Objectives

Emergency ultrasound (EUS) is a critical component of emergency medicine (EM) resident education. Currently, there is no consensus list of competencies for EUS training, and graduating residents have varying levels of skill and comfort. The objective of this study was to define a widely accepted comprehensive list of EUS competencies for graduating EM residents through a modified Delphi method.

Methods

We developed a list of EUS applications through a comprehensive literature search, the American College of Emergency Physicians list of core EUS benchmarks, and the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency-Academy of Emergency Ultrasound consensus document. We assembled a multi-institutional expert panel including 15 faculty members from diverse practice environments and geographical regions. The panel voted on the list of competencies through two rounds of a modified Delphi process using a modified Likert scale (1 = not at all important, 5 = very important) to determine levels of agreement for each application-with revisions occurring between the two rounds. High agreement for consensus was set at >80%.

Results

Fifteen of 15 panelists completed the first-round survey (100%) that included 359 topics related to EUS. After the first round, 195 applications achieved high agreement, four applications achieved medium agreement, and 164 applications achieved low agreement. After the discussion, we removed three questions and added 13 questions. Fifteen of 15 panelists completed the second round of the survey (100%) with 209 of the 369 applications achieving consensus.

Conclusion

Our final list represents expert opinion on EUS competencies for graduating EM residents. We hope to use this consensus list to implement a more consistent EUS curriculum for graduating EM residents and to standardize EUS training across EM residency programs.

Glenohumeral joint effusion assessment with point-of-care ultrasound

ABSTRACT

Ultrasound has favorable diagnostic accuracy for detecting glenohumeral joint effusions. This article describes an easy-to-learn and interpret limited glenohumeral joint ultrasound examination that can help guide further evaluation and treatment. We report on a patient ultimately diagnosed with septic arthritis of the glenohumeral joint, the associated joint effusion having been detected on bedside ultrasound. This ultrasound examination is applicable to generalist PAs and those working in orthopedics and acute care settings.

Ultrasound for the diagnosis of shoulder dislocation and reduction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Shoulder dislocations are a common injury prompting presentation to the emergency department. Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is a diagnostic tool for shoulder dislocations, which has the potential to reduce time to diagnosis and reduction, radiation exposure, and health care costs. This systematic review sought to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of POCUS for diagnosing shoulder dislocations.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, LILACS, the Cochrane databases, Google Scholar, and bibliographies of selected articles for all prospective and randomized controlled trials evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of POCUS for identifying shoulder dislocations. We dual-extracted data into a predefined worksheet and performed quality analysis using the QUADAS-2 tool. We performed a meta-analysis with subgroup analyses by technique and transducer type. As a secondary outcome, we assessed the diagnostic accuracy of identifying associated fractures.

RESULTS

Ten studies met our inclusion criteria, comprising 1,836 assessments with 636 dislocations (34.6%). Overall, POCUS was 100% (95% confidence interval [CI], 85.6%-100%) sensitive and 100% (95% CI, 79.4%-100%) specific for the diagnosis of shoulder dislocation with a LR+ of 11,254.8 (95% CI, 3.9-3.3e7) and a LR- of <0.1 (95% CI, < 0.1-0.2). When compared with the anterior/lateral technique, the posterior technique had greater sensitivity but no difference in specificity. There was no difference between transducer types. POCUS was also 96.8% (95% CI, 92.6%-98.7%) sensitive and 99.7% (95% CI, 92.5%-100%) specific for the diagnosis of associated fractures.

CONCLUSIONS

POCUS is a sensitive and specific tool for the rapid identification of shoulder dislocations and reductions, as well as for the detection of associated fractures. POCUS should be considered as an alternate diagnostic tool for the diagnosis and management of shoulder dislocations.

The Use of Point-of-Care Ultrasound for Arthrocentesis Among Emergency Medicine Residents

Introduction

The objective of this study is to determine if EM resident physicians are able to successfully utilize POCUS to perform an arthrocentesis in the ED. This is a retrospective review of ED patients who received an ultrasound-guided or ultrasound-assisted arthrocentesis performed in the ED over a 6-year period by an EM resident physician.

Methods

This was a retrospective review of ED patients who received an ultrasound-guided or ultrasound-assisted arthrocentesis performed in the ED over a 6-year period by an EM resident physician. An ED POCUS database was reviewed for POCUS examinations where an arthrocentesis was performed. Electronic medical records were then reviewed for demographic characteristics, history, physical examination findings, ED course, additional imaging studies, and the impact of the POCUS study on patient care and disposition.

Results

A total of 101 POCUS examinations of patients were included in the final analysis. The POCUS examinations and procedures were performed by 59 different EM residents at various levels of training. Overall, 92.1% (93/101) of the procedures were successful. When assessing for image quality, 98/101 (97%) had recognizable structures at minimum. The majority of the patients (84/101, 83.2%) received additional imaging of the affected joint. In the minority of cases (23/101, 22.8%), the ultrasound-assisted approach was utilized, while 78/100 (77.2%) utilized the ultrasound-guided approach. For the studies that utilized the ultrasound-guided approach, the quality of needle visualization was determined to be “good” 40/78 (51.3%).

Conclusion

EM resident physicians are able to utilize POCUS to perform an arthrocentesis in the ED. Further research is encouraged to determine whether having residents utilize POCUS to perform an arthrocentesis has a significant impact on outcomes and patient care.