eFAST exam errors at a level 1 trauma center: A retrospective cohort study

Objectives: Extended Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (eFAST) ultrasound exams are central to the care of the unstable trauma patient. We examined six years of eFAST quality assurance data to identify the most common reasons for false positive and false negative eFAST exams. Methods: This was an observational, retrospective cohort study of trauma activation patients evaluated in an urban, academic Level 1 trauma center. All eFAST exams that were identified as false positive or false negative exams compared with computed tomography (CT) imaging were included. Results: 4860 eFAST exams were performed on trauma patients. 1450 (29.8%) were undocumented, technically limited, or incomplete (missing images). Of the 3410 remaining exams, 180 (5.27%) were true positive and 3128 (91.7%) were true negative. 27 (0.79%) exams were identified as false positive and 75 (2.19%) were identified as false negative. Of the false positive scans, 7 had no CT scan and 8 had correct real-time trauma paper documentation of eFAST exam results when compared to CT and were excluded, leaving 12 false positive scans. Of the false negative scans, 11 were excluded for concordant documentation in real-time trauma room paper documentation, 20 were excluded for no CT scan, and 2 were excluded as incomplete, leaving 42 false negative scans. Pelvic fluid, double-line sign, pericardial fat pad, and the thoracic portion of the eFAST exam were the most common source of errors. Conclusion: The eFAST exams in trauma activation patients are highly accurate. Unfortunately poor documentation and technically limited/incomplete studies represent 29.8% of our eFAST exams. Pelvic fluid, double-line sign, pericardial fat pad, and the thoracic portion of the eFAST exam are the most common source of errors. (c) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.