Academic Appointments

Administrative Appointments

  • Assistant Director of Research, Emergency Ultrasound Section (2018 - Present)

Professional Education

  • MPH, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health
  • Emergency Ultrasound Fellowship, Brigham and Women's Hospital
  • Emergency Medicine Residency, Mount Sinai School of Medicine - Beth Israel
  • MD, Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons

All Publications

  • Lung Ultrasound Findings in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19. Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine Kumar, A., Weng, Y., Duanmu, Y., Graglia, S., Lalani, F., Gandhi, K., Lobo, V., Jensen, T., Chung, S., Nahn, J., Kugler, J. 2021


    OBJECTIVES: Lung ultrasound (LUS) can accurately diagnose several pulmonary diseases, including pneumothorax, effusion, and pneumonia. LUS may be useful in the diagnosis and management of COVID-19.METHODS: This study was conducted at two United States hospitals from 3/21/2020 to 6/01/2020. Our inclusion criteria included hospitalized adults with COVID-19 (based on symptomatology and a confirmatory RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2) who received a LUS. Providers used a 12-zone LUS scanning protocol. The images were interpreted by the researchers based on a pre-developed consensus document. Patients were stratified by clinical deterioration (defined as either ICU admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death within 28days from the initial symptom onset) and time from symptom onset to their scan.RESULTS: N = 22 patients (N = 36 scans) were included. Eleven (50%) patients experienced clinical deterioration. Among N = 36 scans, only 3 (8%) were classified as normal. The remaining scans demonstrated B-lines (89%), consolidations (56%), pleural thickening (47%), and pleural effusion (11%). Scans from patients with clinical deterioration demonstrated higher percentages of bilateral consolidations (50 versus 15%; P = .033), anterior consolidations (47 versus 11%; P = .047), lateral consolidations (71 versus 29%; P = .030), pleural thickening (69 versus 30%; P = .045), but not B-lines (100 versus 80%; P = .11). Abnormal findings had similar prevalences between scans collected 0-6days and 14-28days from symptom onset.DISCUSSION: Certain LUS findings may be common in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, especially for those that experience clinical deterioration. These findings may occur anytime throughout the first 28days of illness. Future efforts should investigate the predictive utility of these findings on clinical outcomes.

    View details for DOI 10.1002/jum.15683

    View details for PubMedID 33665872

  • Interobserver agreement of lung ultrasound findings of COVID-19. Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine Kumar, A., Weng, Y., Graglia, S., Chung, S., Duanmu, Y., Lalani, F., Gandhi, K., Lobo, V., Jensen, T., Nahn, J., Kugler, J. 2021


    BACKGROUND: Lung ultrasound (LUS) has received considerable interest in the clinical evaluation of patients with COVID-19. Previously described LUS manifestations for COVID-19 include B-lines, consolidations, and pleural thickening. The interrater reliability (IRR) of these findings for COVID-19 is unknown.METHODS: This study was conducted between March and June 2020. Nine physicians (hospitalists: n = 4; emergency medicine: n = 5) from 3 medical centers independently evaluated n = 20 LUS scans (n = 180 independent observations) collected from patients with COVID-19, diagnosed via RT-PCR. These studies were randomly selected from an image database consisting of COVID-19 patients evaluated in the emergency department with portable ultrasound devices. Physicians were blinded to any patient information or previous LUS interpretation. Kappa values (kappa) were used to calculate IRR.RESULTS: There was substantial IRR on the following items: normal LUS scan (kappa = 0.79 [95% CI: 0.72-0.87]), presence of B-lines (kappa = 0.79 [95% CI: 0.72-0.87]), ≥3 B-lines observed (kappa = 0.72 [95% CI: 0.64-0.79]). Moderate IRR was observed for the presence of any consolidation (kappa = 0.57 [95% CI: 0.50-0.64]), subpleural consolidation (kappa = 0.49 [95% CI: 0.42-0.56]), and presence of effusion (kappa = 0.49 [95% CI: 0.41-0.56]). Fair IRR was observed for pleural thickening (kappa = 0.23 [95% CI: 0.15-0.30]).DISCUSSION: Many LUS manifestations for COVID-19 appear to have moderate to substantial IRR across providers from multiple specialties utilizing differing portable devices. The most reliable LUS findings with COVID-19 may include the presence/count of B-lines or determining if a scan is normal. Clinical protocols for LUS with COVID-19 may require additional observers for the confirmation of less reliable findings such as consolidations.

    View details for DOI 10.1002/jum.15620

    View details for PubMedID 33426734

  • Visual Estimation of Tricuspid Annular Plane Systolic Excursion by Emergency Medicine Clinicians. The western journal of emergency medicine Duanmu, Y., Goldsmith, A. J., Henwood, P. C., Platz, E., Hoyler, J. E., Kimberly, H. H. 2020; 21 (4): 1022–28


    INTRODUCTION: Tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) is an established echocardiographic marker of right ventricular (RV) systolic function. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether emergency clinicians can visually estimate RV function using TAPSE in a set of video clips compared to a reference standard M-mode measurement.METHODS: Emergency clinicians were shown a five-minute educational video on TAPSE. Participants then viewed 20 apical four-chamber point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) echocardiography clips and recorded their estimate of TAPSE distance in centimeters (cm), as well as whether TAPSE was normal (>1.9 cm), borderline (1.5-1.9 cm), or abnormal (<1.5 cm). We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy of visual TAPSE categorization using M-mode measurement as the criterion standard. Participants also reported their comfort with assessing TAPSE on a five-point Likert scale before and after participation in the study.RESULTS: Among 70 emergency clinicians, including 20 postgraduate year 1-4 residents, 22 attending physicians, and 28 physician assistants (PA), the pooled sensitivity and specificity for visual assessment of TAPSE was 88.6% (95% confidence interval, 85.4-91.7%) and 81.6% (95% CI, 78.2-84.4%), respectively. The sensitivity and specificity for the clips in which the measured TAPSE was <1.5 cm or >1.9 cm was 91.4% (95% CI, 88.4-94.3%) and 90.8% (95% CI, 87.7-93.9%), respectively. There was no significant difference in sensitivity (p = 0.27) or specificity (p = 0.55) between resident and attending physicians or between physicians and PAs (p = 0.17 and p = 0.81). Median self-reported comfort with TAPSE assessment increased from 1 (interquartile range [IQR] 1-2) to 3 (IQR 3-4) points after participation in the study.CONCLUSION: A wide range of emergency clinicians demonstrated fair accuracy for visual estimation of TAPSE on previously recorded POCUS echocardiography video clips. These findings should be considered hypothesis generating and warrant validation in larger, prospective studies.

    View details for DOI 10.5811/westjem.2020.5.46714

    View details for PubMedID 32726278

  • Characteristics of Emergency Department Patients With COVID-19 at a Single Site in Northern California: Clinical Observations and Public Health Implications. Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine Duanmu, Y. n., Brown, I. P., Gibb, W. R., Singh, J. n., Matheson, L. W., Blomkalns, A. L., Govindarajan, P. n. 2020


    In December 2019, a novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) emerged in Wuhan, China and spread globally, resulting in the first World Health Organization (WHO) classified pandemic in over a decade.1 As of April 2020, the United States (US) has the most confirmed COVID-19 cases worldwide, but public health interventions and testing availability have varied across the country. 2.

    View details for DOI 10.1111/acem.14003

    View details for PubMedID 32344458

  • Correlation of OSCE performance and point-of-care ultrasound scan numbers among a cohort of emergency medicine residents ULTRASOUND JOURNAL Duanmu, Y., Henwood, P. C., Takhar, S. S., Chan, W., Rempell, J. S., Liteplo, A. S., Koskenoja, V., Noble, V. E., Kimberly, H. H. 2019; 11
  • Accuracy of Resident-Performed Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasound Examinations Versus Chest Radiography in Pneumothorax Follow-up After Tube Thoracostomy in Rwanda. Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine Shumbusho, J. P., Duanmu, Y. n., Kim, S. H., Bassett, I. V., Boyer, E. W., Ruutiainen, A. T., Riviello, R. n., Ntirenganya, F. n., Henwood, P. C. 2019


    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.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.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).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.

    View details for DOI 10.1002/jum.15126

    View details for PubMedID 31490569

  • Correlation of OSCE performance and point-of-care ultrasound scan numbers among a cohort of emergency medicine residents. The ultrasound journal Duanmu, Y. n., Henwood, P. C., Takhar, S. S., Chan, W. n., Rempell, J. S., Liteplo, A. S., Koskenoja, V. n., Noble, V. E., Kimberly, H. H. 2019; 11 (1): 3


    Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is an important clinical tool for a growing number of medical specialties. The current American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) Ultrasound Guidelines recommend that trainees perform 150-300 ultrasound scans as part of POCUS training. We sought to assess the relationship between ultrasound scan numbers and performance on an ultrasound-focused observed structured clinical examination (OSCE).This was a cross-sectional cohort study in which the number of ultrasound scans residents had previously performed were obtained from a prospective database and compared with their total score on an ultrasound OSCE. Ultrasound fellowship trained emergency physicians administered a previously published OSCE that consisted of standardized questions testing image acquisition and interpretation, ultrasound machine mechanics, patient positioning, and troubleshooting. Residents were observed while performing core applications including aorta, biliary, cardiac, deep vein thrombosis, Focused Assessment with Sonography in Trauma (FAST), pelvic, and thoracic ultrasound imaging.Twenty-nine postgraduate year (PGY)-3 and PGY-4 emergency medicine (EM) residents participated in the OSCE. The median OSCE score was 354 [interquartile range (IQR) 343-361] out of a total possible score of 370. Trainees had previously performed a median of 341 [IQR 289-409] total scans. Residents with more than 300 ultrasound scans had a median OSCE score of 355 [IQR 351-360], which was slightly higher than the median OSCE score of 342 [IQR 326-361] in the group with less than 300 total scans (p = 0.04). Overall, a LOWESS curve demonstrated a positive association between scan numbers and OSCE scores with graphical review of the data suggesting a plateau effect.The results of this small single residency program study suggest a pattern of improvement in OSCE performance as scan numbers increased, with the appearance of a plateau effect around 300 scans. Further investigation of this correlation in diverse practice environments and within individual ultrasound modalities will be necessary to create generalizable recommendations for scan requirements as part of overall POCUS proficiency assessment.

    View details for DOI 10.1186/s13089-019-0118-7

    View details for PubMedID 31359167