Accuracy of Resident-Performed Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasound Examinations Versus Chest Radiography in Pneumothorax Follow-up After Tube Thoracostomy in Rwanda.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and timeliness of resident-performed point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) examinations for the follow-up of pneumothorax (PTX) after tube thoracostomy.

Methods: After brief training, Rwandan surgical residents blinded to chest radiography (CXR) performed and interpreted LUS examinations for PTX in participants undergoing CXR for PTX follow-up. Treating clinicians interpreted CXR for the presence of PTX for therapeutic decisions. Lung ultrasound was later reviewed by ultrasound experts, and CXR was reviewed by a radiologist. We defined expert LUS interpretation as the reference standard. The sensitivity and specificity of resident-performed LUS examinations for diagnosing PTX were calculated. We assessed agreement between trained resident versus expert LUS and clinician versus radiology CXR using the Cohen κ coefficient. We compared the time to results between LUS and CXR.

Results: Over an 8-month period, 51 participants were enrolled. Compared to expert LUS interpretation, the sensitivity and specificity (95% confidence intervals) of resident LUS were 100% (85%-100%) and 96% (82%-100%), respectively, whereas the sensitivity and specificity of clinician-interpreted CXR were 48% (27%-69%) and 100% (88%-100%). The agreement between resident and expert LUS was excellent (κ = 0.96), whereas the agreement between clinician and radiologist CXR was only moderate (κ = 0.60). The time to results was significantly longer for CXR than LUS (mean, 1335 versus 396 minutes; P = .0001).

Conclusions: A resident-performed LUS examination was a quicker imaging modality with superior sensitivity compared to clinician-interpreted CXR for PTX follow-up after tube thoracostomy in this Rwandan study. Lung ultrasound can be a valuable imaging tool for PTX follow-up, especially in resource-limited settings.