were diagnosed with COVID-19 pneumonia and required oxygen therapy and antibiotics. Many (67%) also received antivirals. Regarding delivery, all nine were live births delivered via cesarean section with 1-min Apgar scores of 8-9 and 5-min Apgar scores of 9-10. Four of the 9 were delivered prematurely at 36 weeks (44%) for a variety of reasons including premature rupture of membranes, pre-eclampsia, or pneumonia. None of the fluid samples at birth were positive for COVID-19. Additionally, all of the mothers and babies were discharged from the hospital.Limitations discussed include the retrospective nature of data abstraction and small sample size. Additionally all patients enrolled were in the third trimester. The authors concluded that pregnant patients with COVID-19 present with similar symptoms as nonpregnant patients. Also, based on this limited sample, the mothers had a low risk of complications and all of the infants tested negative for COVID-19 after birth, suggesting that vertical transmission is unlikely.

No abstract

PurposeEmergency Medicine (EM) residents take the American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM) in-training exam, and performance on this exam has been shown to correlate to performance on the ABEM qualifying exam. Though many residencies have in-training exam preparation activities, there is little data on the effectiveness of these efforts. This study aimed to elicit resident perspectives about the exam and exam preparation in order to generate hypotheses and better inform future preparation efforts.MethodsSecond- and third-year EM residents at a single institution were interviewed using a semi-structured format. Qualitative methodology was used to analyze the data.ResultsThirteen EM residents participated in the study. Eight major themes and 18 sub-themes were identified. These were further characterized as relating to the exam itself or to exam preparation. Residents generally value the in-training exam. Sixty-nine percent noted that it provided an assessment of their current knowledge and deficiencies. Thirty-eight percent noted that it improved familiarity with the qualifying exam. Regarding exam preparation, residents stated that a question format was preferred, especially when accompanying explanations were of high quality. Additionally, practical considerations, such as portability, impacted resident selection of study tools.ConclusionResidents value the in-training exam as a marker of their academic progress and for their ability to gain familiarity with the qualifying exam. They prefer question-based preparation over text-based learning, as long as there is a detailed explanation of each answer. Educators creating structured in-training review may want to focus on question-based material with detailed explanations.

was 2 days (range 0-42). Nearly all were categorized as asymptomatic (4.4%), mild (50.9%), or moderate (38.8%) severity, leaving only 5.9% as severe or critical. Looking at breakdown by age, infants made up the highest proportion of severe or critical disease (32%) with preschool ages (1-5 years) next with 28.8%. Half (7) of the 13 critical patients were under 1 year old. No significant differences were seen between male or female patients. There was one death in the sample: a 14-year old boy.Limitations included lack of clinical characteristics, as only data from the Chinese CDC was used rather than electronic medical records from individual patients. Additionally the majority of cases were suspected, not confirmed, and some of the children remained hospitalized at the end of the study therefore severity of disease may not be accurate. The authors concluded that COVID-19 caused infection in all ages without obvious gender differences, however younger children appeared to have higher severity of disease.

The Ultrasound Challenge was developed at The Ohio State University College of Medicine to introduce focused ultrasound to medical students. The goal was to develop experience in ultrasound through practice and competition. Initially this competition was held between Ohio State University College of Medicine students from years 1 through 4. The Ultrasound Challenge 2.0 was held in 2013. The event expanded on the previous structure by including students from the Wayne State University College of Medicine. The goal of this article is to describe our experiences with expansion of our interinstitutional ultrasound event. The challenge consisted of 6 stations: focused assessment with sonography for trauma, aortic ultrasound, cardiac ultrasound, pelvic ultrasound, musculoskeletal ultrasound, and vascular access. The participants were given a handbook outlining the expectations for each station ahead of time. Vascular access was graded in real time using the Brightness Mode Quality Ultrasound Imaging Examination Technique (B-QUIET) method. The remainder were timed, saved, and graded after the event by 3 independent faculty members using the B-QUIET method. The highest score with the fastest time was the winner. The Ultrasound Challenge 2.0 included 40 participants: 31 from The Ohio State University College of Medicine and 9 from the Wayne State University College of Medicine. The makeup of the winners in all categories consisted of 1 first-year medical student, 7 second-year medical students, 3 third-year medical students, and 10 fourth-year medical students. The Ultrasound Challenge 2.0 was a success for those who participated. It provided the first known interinstitutional medical student ultrasound competition. Students from both institutions were able to practice their image acquisition skills, demonstrate abilities in a competitive environment, and develop collegiality and teamwork.