Literature DB >> 29131347

Critical care ultrasound: A national survey across specialties.

Jeffrey R Stowell1,2, Ross Kessler3, Resa E Lewiss4, Igor Barjaktarevic5, Bikash Bhattarai6,7, Napatkamon Ayutyanont6,7, John L Kendall8.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Management of the critically ill patient requires rapid assessment and differentiation. Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) improves diagnostic accuracy and guides resuscitation. This study sought to describe the use of critical care related POCUS amongst different specialties.
METHODS: This study was conducted as an online 18-question survey. Survey questions queried respondent demographics, preferences for POCUS use, and barriers to implementation.
RESULTS: 2735 recipients received and viewed the survey with 416 (15.2%) responses. The majority of respondents were pulmonary and critical care medicine (62.5%) and emergency medicine (19.9%) providers. Respondents obtained training through educational courses (26.5%), fellowship (23.9%), residency (21.6%), or self-guided learning (17.2%). POCUS use was common for diagnostic and procedural guidance. Emergency medicine providers were more likely to utilize POCUS to evaluate undifferentiated hypotension (98.5%, P < .001), volume status and fluid responsiveness (88.2%, P = .005), and cardiopulmonary arrest (94.1%, P < .001) compared to other specialties. Limited training, competency, or credentialing were the most common barriers, in up to 39.4% of respondents.
CONCLUSION: Study respondents utilize POCUS in a variety of clinical applications. However, a disparity in utilization still exists among clinicians who care for critically ill patients. Overcoming barriers, such as a lack of formalized training, competency, or credentialing, may lead to increased utilization.
© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  critical care; education; emergency medicine; ultrasound

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29131347     DOI: 10.1002/jcu.22559

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Ultrasound        ISSN: 0091-2751            Impact factor:   0.910


  6 in total

1.  Skills acquisition for novice learners after a point-of-care ultrasound course: does clinical rank matter?

Authors:  Toru Yamada; Taro Minami; Nilam J Soni; Eiji Hiraoka; Hiromizu Takahashi; Tomoya Okubo; Juichi Sato
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2018-08-22       Impact factor: 2.463

2.  Point-of-Care Ultrasound Identifies Decompensated Heart Failure in a Young Male with Methamphetamine-Associated Cardiomyopathy Presenting in Severe Sepsis to the Emergency Department.

Authors:  David Kinas; Michael Dalley; Kayla Guidry; Mark A Newberry; David A Farcy
Journal:  Case Rep Emerg Med       Date:  2018-10-09

3.  Respiratory Variations in Peak Peripheral Artery Velocities and Waveforms for Rapid Assessment of Fluid Responsiveness in Traumatic Shock Patients.

Authors:  Qian Zhang; Xiu-Rong Shi; Yi Shan; Jian Wan; Xuan Ju; Xi Song; Conghui Fan; Xinyuan Lu; Jie Sun; Liwei Duan; Zhaofen Lin; Jinlong Liu
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2021-01-08

4.  Artificial intelligence (AI) versus expert: A comparison of left ventricular outflow tract velocity time integral (LVOT-VTI) assessment between ICU doctors and an AI tool.

Authors:  Shanshan Zhai; Hui Wang; Lichao Sun; Bo Zhang; Feng Huo; Shuang Qiu; Xiaoqing Wu; Junyu Ma; Yina Wu; Jun Duan
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2022-07-11       Impact factor: 2.243

5.  Ultrasound Hypotension Protocol Time-motion Study Using the Multifrequency Single Transducer Versus a Multiple Transducer Ultrasound Device.

Authors:  Linda Sabbadini; Rocco Germano; Emily Hopkins; Jason S Haukoos; John L Kendall
Journal:  West J Emerg Med       Date:  2021-04-08

Review 6.  Pick Up Your Probes: A Call for Clinically Oriented Point-of-Care Ultrasound Research in COVID-19.

Authors:  Alan T Chiem; Jacqueline Shibata; George Lim; Yiju Teresa Liu
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2020-07-20       Impact factor: 2.754

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.