Literature DB >> 22518906

Office-based ultrasound screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Beau Blois1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of an office-based, family physician–administered ultrasound examination to screen for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA).
DESIGN: A prospective observational study. Consecutive patients were approached by nonphysician staff.
SETTING: Rural family physician offices in Grand Forks and Revelstoke, BC. PARTICIPANTS: The Canadian Society for Vascular Surgery screening recommendations for AAA were used to help select patients who were at risk of AAA. All men 65 years of age or older were included. Women 65 years of age or older were included if they were current smokers or had diabetes, hypertension, a history of coronary artery disease, or a family history of AAA. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: A focused “quick screen”, which measured the maximal diameter of the abdominal aorta using point-of-care ultrasound technology, was performed in the office by a resident physician trained in emergency ultrasonography. Each patient was then booked for a criterion standard scan (i.e., a conventional abdominal ultrasound scan performed by a technician and interpreted by a radiologist). The maximal abdominal aortic diameter measured by ultrasound in the office was compared with that measured by the criterion standard method. The time to screen each patient was recorded.
RESULTS: Forty-five patients were included in data analysis; 62% of participants were men. The mean age was 73 years. The mean pairwise difference between the office-based ultrasound scan and the criterion standard scan was not statistically significant. The mean absolute difference between the 2 scans was 0.20 cm (95% CI 0.15 to 0.25 cm). Correlation between the scans was 0.81. The office-based ultrasound scan had both a sensitivity and a specificity of 100%. The mean time to screen each patient was 212 seconds (95% CI 194 to 230 seconds).
CONCLUSION: Abdominal aortic aneurysm screening can be safely performed in the office by family physicians who are trained to use point-of- care ultrasound technology. The screening test can be completed within the time constraints of a busy family practice office visit. The benefit of screening for AAA in rural patients might be great if local diagnostic ultrasound service and emergent transport to a vascular surgeon are not available.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22518906      PMCID: PMC3303671     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can Fam Physician        ISSN: 0008-350X            Impact factor:   3.275


  26 in total

1.  Differences in observer variability of ultrasound measurements of the proximal and distal abdominal aorta.

Authors:  H J Pleumeekers; A W Hoes; P G Mulder; E van der Does; A Hofman; J S Laméris; D E Grobbee
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 2.136

2.  Intra- and interobserver variability in ultrasound measurements of abdominal aortic diameter. The Tromsø Study.

Authors:  K Singh; K H Bønaa; S Solberg; D G Sørlie; L Bjørk
Journal:  Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 7.069

3.  Ultrasound: the stethoscope of the future, alas.

Authors:  R A Filly
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1988-05       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Evaluation of a mobile screening service for abdominal aortic aneurysm in Broken Hill, a remote regional centre in far western NSW.

Authors:  Margaret S Lesjak; Stephen C Flecknoe-Brown; Jan R Sidford; Kerryn Payne; John P Fletcher; David M Lyle
Journal:  Aust J Rural Health       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 1.662

5.  Personal ultrasound imager: abdominal aortic aneurysm screening.

Authors:  C J Bruce; P C Spittell; S C Montgomery; K R Bailey; A J Tajik; J B Seward
Journal:  J Am Soc Echocardiogr       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 5.251

6.  The Multicentre Aneurysm Screening Study (MASS) into the effect of abdominal aortic aneurysm screening on mortality in men: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  H A Ashton; M J Buxton; N E Day; L G Kim; T M Marteau; R A P Scott; S G Thompson; N M Walker
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2002-11-16       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  The difference between ultrasound and computed tomography (CT) measurements of aortic diameter increases with aortic diameter: analysis of axial images of abdominal aortic and common iliac artery diameter in normal and aneurysmal aortas. The Tromsø Study, 1994-1995.

Authors:  K Singh; B K Jacobsen; S Solberg; S Kumar; E Arnesen
Journal:  Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 7.069

8.  The cost-effectiveness of a "quick-screen" program for abdominal aortic aneurysms.

Authors:  Thomas Y Lee; Peter Korn; Jennifer A Heller; Sashi Kilaru; Frederick P Beavers; Harry L Bush; K Craig Kent
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 3.982

9.  Is screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm acceptable to the population? Selection and recruitment to hospital-based mass screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Authors:  J S Lindholt; S Juul; E W Henneberg; H Fasting
Journal:  J Public Health Med       Date:  1998-06

10.  Variability in measurement of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Detection and Management Veterans Administration Cooperative Study Group.

Authors:  F A Lederle; S E Wilson; G R Johnson; D B Reinke; F N Littooy; C W Acher; L M Messina; D J Ballard; H J Ansel
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 4.268

View more
  8 in total

Review 1.  Point-of-Care Ultrasound in General Practice: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Camilla Aakjær Andersen; Sinead Holden; Jonathan Vela; Michael Skovdal Rathleff; Martin Bach Jensen
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 5.166

2.  Recommendations on screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm in primary care.

Authors: 
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2017-09-11       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Canadian national survey of family medicine residents on point-of-care ultrasound training.

Authors:  Shuo Peng; Taft Micks; David Braganza; Kyle Sue; Michael Woo; Peter Rogers; Sarah Freedman; John Lewis; Shirley Hu; Catherine Varner; Nisarg Patel; Saadia Hameed; Peter Steinmetz
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 3.275

4.  Using Standardized Patients to Teach Point-of-Care Ultrasound-Guided Physical Examination Skills to Internal Medicine Residents.

Authors:  Joseph H Skalski; Muhamad Elrashidi; Darcy A Reed; Furman S McDonald; Anjali Bhagra
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2015-03

5.  Fetal outcomes following emergency department point-of-care ultrasound for vaginal bleeding in early pregnancy.

Authors:  Catherine Varner; Dahlia Balaban; Shelley McLeod; Sally Carver; Bjug Borgundvaag
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 3.275

6.  USEFUL: Ultrasound Exam for Underlying Lesions incorporated into physical exam.

Authors:  Jon Steller; Bianca Russell; Shahram Lotfipour; Graciela Maldonado; Tim Siepel; Halsey Jakle; Stacy Hata; Alan Chiem; John Christian Fox
Journal:  West J Emerg Med       Date:  2014-01-09

Review 7.  Potential for Use of Portable Ultrasound Devices in Rural and Remote Settings in Australia and Other Developed Countries: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Liam Shaddock; Tony Smith
Journal:  J Multidiscip Healthc       Date:  2022-03-29

Review 8.  Point-of-care ultrasound in primary care: a systematic review of generalist performed point-of-care ultrasound in unselected populations.

Authors:  Bjarte Sorensen; Steinar Hunskaar
Journal:  Ultrasound J       Date:  2019-11-19
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.