Emergency medicine
Majid Zamani; Maliheh Mazaheri; Farhad Heydari; Babak Masoumi
Volume 7, Issue 1 , January 2021, , Pages 17-21
Abstract
Objective: Ultrasonography (US) is not the method of choice for the diagnosis of calcaneal fractures. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of US with plain radiography in the diagnosis of calcaneus fractures following blunt ankle and foot trauma. Methods: In this cross-sectional ...
Read More
Objective: Ultrasonography (US) is not the method of choice for the diagnosis of calcaneal fractures. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of US with plain radiography in the diagnosis of calcaneus fractures following blunt ankle and foot trauma. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 214 patients (over 18 years) presenting to the emergency department (ED) with suspicion of traumatic calcaneus fracture following acute blunt trauma, were enrolled. Bedside ultrasonography was performed and interpreted by emergency physicians. After that, plain radiography was performed. Furthermore, all the patients were assessed by computed tomography (CT) scan as the gold standard. Results: Finally, 193 patients were enrolled with a mean age of 29.4±15.7 years (85.5% male). Fractures in the calcaneus were detected in 49 patients. The sensitivity and specificity of ultrasonography in the detection of calcaneal fractures were 83.6%, (confidence interval (CI), 69.7 –92.2) and 100% (95% CI, 96.7 –100), while the sensitivity and specificity of X-ray were 87.7% (95% CI, 74.5 –94.9) and 100% (95% CI, 96.7 –100). There was no false positive result for X-ray and US. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that bedside US with an acceptable sensitivity and specificity can be used as a promising alternative for the diagnosis of calcaneal fracture in ED.
Emergency medicine
Farhad Heydari; Shiva Samsam Shariat; Saeed Majidinejad; Babak Masoumi
Volume 4, Issue 1 , January 2018, , Pages 24-28
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to use ultrasonography for the diagnosis and confirmation of Pulled Elbow treatment.Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study initiated in 2014 and continued until 2015. We used simple sampling method and recruited 60 samples among patients aged 4 months to ...
Read More
Objective: The aim of this study was to use ultrasonography for the diagnosis and confirmation of Pulled Elbow treatment.Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study initiated in 2014 and continued until 2015. We used simple sampling method and recruited 60 samples among patients aged 4 months to 6 years. The apparatus used in this study was an ultrasonogram with transducer 12 MHz probe. Ultrasound evaluation of both hands was undertaken and after reduction, the physical examination was performed to confirm the diagnosis made by ultrasonography. Then, the results were recorded by a physician in a checklist and entered into SPSS software (version 20) for further analysis.Results: In this study, 60 children with pulled elbow injuries were studied. Of these, 27 patients (45%) were girls (female) and 33 (55%) were boys (male). This indicates the higher incidence of injury among males than females. The highest incidence of pulled elbow injury was observed in children aged 3 (15%). The accuracy of ultrasonography method for the confirmation of treatment was reported to be 92%.Conclusion: This study aimed to confirm the considered therapeutic method based on the result of ultrasonography performed after the treatment. Accordingly, the sensitivity and specificity of ultrasonography in confirming the considered therapeutic method for the treatment of pulled elbow was obtained higher than 90%.