title: Use of ultrasound guidance for central venous catheter placement: survey from the American Board of Emergency Medicine Longitudinal Study of Emergency Physicians.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The objective was to survey practicing emergency physicians (EPs) across the United States regarding the frequency of using ultrasound (US) guidance in central venous catheter (CVC) placement and, secondarily, to determine factors associated with the use or barriers to the use of US guidance.
  
  
  METHODS
  This was a cross-sectional survey mailed to presumed practicing EPs as part of the American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM)'s longitudinal study of EPs. The selection process used stratified, random sampling of cohorts thought to represent four different stages within the development of the specialty of emergency medicine (EM). Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent factors associated with both high comfort using US guidance and high-percentage usage of US guidance.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The survey was mailed to 1,165 subjects, and the response rate was 79%. The median number of years of practice was 20 (interquartile range [IQR]=7 to 28 years). As their primary practice setting, 64% work in private or community hospitals, 60% received training in US-guided vascular access, and 44% never use US guidance in placing CVCs. Barriers differed in those who never use US and those who sometimes or always used US guidance. In those who never use US, top barriers were insufficient training (67%) and lack of equipment (25%). In those who use US, top barriers were the perceptions that US was too time-consuming (27%) and that the preferred site was not amenable to US (24%). Independent factors associated with high comfort and high-percentage use of US guidance were training in US-guided vascular access (adjusted odds ratio=5.1 [high comfort]; 95% confidence interval [CI]=2.6 to 10.1; adjusted odds ratio 11.1=(high percentage); 95% CI=5.0 to 24.8) and being a recent residency graduate.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Among EPs, the translation of evidence to clinical practice regarding the benefits of US guidance for CVC placement is poor and still faces many barriers. Training and education are potentially the best ways to overcome such barriers.
authors.affiliation: The Department of Emergency Medicine, Denver Health Medical Center, Denver, CO; The University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO.
authors.forename: Matthew S
authors.initials: MS
authors.lastname: Buchanan
authors.forename: Brandon
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Backlund
authors.forename: Michael M
authors.initials: MM
authors.lastname: Liao
authors.forename: Jun
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Sun
authors.forename: Rita K
authors.initials: RK
authors.lastname: Cydulka
authors.forename: Rebecca
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Smith-Coggins
authors.forename: John
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Kendall
mesh_terms: D002405:Catheterization, Central Venous / Q000379:methods*; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D004635:Emergency Medicine / Q000193:education / Q000379:methods*; D019538:Health Care Surveys; D006801:Humans; D016015:Logistic Models; D015999:Multivariate Analysis; D010818:Practice Patterns, Physicians' / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D057566:Self Report; D018084:Ultrasonography, Interventional / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D014481:United States