CJEM Articles: Joe Nemeth

Displaying 1-2 of 2 results

  • January 2012 14 1
    Christine Meyers, Joe Nemeth, Robin Cardamore

    Objectives:

    To quantify the current availability and use of bedside emergency department ultrasonography (EDUS) for blunt trauma at Canadian pediatric centres and to identify any perceived barriers to the use of bedside EDUS in such centres.

    Methods:

    An electronic survey was sent to 162 pediatric emergency physicians and 12 site directors from the 12 pediatric emergency departments across Canada.

    Results:

    Ninety-two percent (11 of 12) of centres completed the survey. The individual physician response rate was 65% (106 of 162), with 100% of site directors responding. Ultrasound machines were available in 45% (5 of 11) of centres. Forty-two percent (32 of 77) of emergency physicians working in equipped pediatric centres used bedside EDUS to evaluate blunt abdominal trauma (BAT). In the subgroup of staff who also worked at adults sites, the frequency of ultrasonography use for the evaluation of pediatric BAT was 75%. In the 55% (6 of 11) of centres without ultrasonography, 88% of staff intend to incorporate its use in the future and 81% indicated that they believed the incorporation of ultrasonography would have a positive impact on patient care. The main perceived barriers to the use of ultrasonography in the evaluation of BAT were a lack of training (41%) and a lack of equipment (26%).

    Conclusion:

    Bedside EDUS is currently used in almost half of pediatric trauma centres, a frequency that is significantly lower than adult centres. Physicians in pediatric centres who use ultrasonography report that it has a high utility, and a great majority of physicians at pediatric centres without EDUS plan to incorporate it in the future. The main reported barriers to its use are a lack of training and a lack of equipment availability.

  • September 2007 9 5
    Joe Nemeth

    When a patient presents to the emergency department with a neurologic deficit and a cerebrovascular event is included in the differential diagnosis, the classic recommendation is to examine the carotid artery and assess for the presence of a bruit. The diagnostic yield and utility of this practice has seldom been called into question. This critical appraisal will review the practice of listening for a carotid artery bruit (CAB) in suspected stroke patients and analyze its clinical utility, including the sensitivity and specificity of a CAB for detecting a significant lesion and the potential impact a CAB may have on the investigation and disposition of such patients.