Adam Hsieh1, Maxwell B Baker2, Joseph M Phalen3, Julio Mejias-Garcia4, Alan Hsieh5, Alex Hsieh6, Robert Canelli4,7. 1. 7938Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, CAN. 2. 12255Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA. 3. 12296Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative Care, and Pain Medicine, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York City, NY, USA. 4. 12259Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA. 5. 12235Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative Medicine, and Pain Management, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA. 6. 25428Department of Emergency Medicine, St. John's Riverside Hospital, Yonkers, NY, USA. 7. 1836Department of Anesthesiology, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Compared to traditional ultrasound machines, emerging handheld point-of-care-ultrasound (HPOCUS) systems exhibit superior portability and affordability. Thus, they have been increasingly embraced in the intensive care setting. However, there is scarce data on patient safety and current regulatory body guidelines are lacking. Here, we critically appraise the literature with a focus on the merits, concerns, and framework of existing POCUS guidelines. Subsequently, we provide recommendations for future regulatory guidelines. METHODS: A comprehensive literature review was conducted using the PubMed database employing the key words "point-of-care/handheld/portable ultrasound" and "guidelines" alone, in combination, and using thesaurus terms. Eligible articles were scrutinized for description of potential benefits and concerns of HPOCUS, especially from a patient safety perspective, as well as currently existing POCUS practice guidelines. Data was extracted, reported thematically using a narrative synthesis approach, then subsequently used to guide our proposed guidelines. RESULTS: The most widely reported benefits of HPOCUS include superior portability, affordability, imaging, facilitation of expedited diagnosis and management, and integration with medical workplace flow. However, major barriers to adoption include device security/patient confidentiality and patient safety. Furthermore, except for a policy published by the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) in 2018, there are few other national regulatory guidelines pertaining to handheld POCUS. In light of this, we propose a framework for HPOCUS guideline development to address these and other concerns. Such guidelines include training and credentialing, bioengineering approval, and strategic integration with electronic medical record systems. CONCLUSION: HPOCUS can be a powerful tool for expedited diagnosis and management guidance. However, there is limited data regarding patient safety and current regulatory body guidelines are lacking. Our assessment illuminates that there remain many unsolved problems about HPOCUS, and in turn, we propose guidelines to address safe regulation and implementation.
BACKGROUND: Compared to traditional ultrasound machines, emerging handheld point-of-care-ultrasound (HPOCUS) systems exhibit superior portability and affordability. Thus, they have been increasingly embraced in the intensive care setting. However, there is scarce data on patient safety and current regulatory body guidelines are lacking. Here, we critically appraise the literature with a focus on the merits, concerns, and framework of existing POCUS guidelines. Subsequently, we provide recommendations for future regulatory guidelines. METHODS: A comprehensive literature review was conducted using the PubMed database employing the key words "point-of-care/handheld/portable ultrasound" and "guidelines" alone, in combination, and using thesaurus terms. Eligible articles were scrutinized for description of potential benefits and concerns of HPOCUS, especially from a patient safety perspective, as well as currently existing POCUS practice guidelines. Data was extracted, reported thematically using a narrative synthesis approach, then subsequently used to guide our proposed guidelines. RESULTS: The most widely reported benefits of HPOCUS include superior portability, affordability, imaging, facilitation of expedited diagnosis and management, and integration with medical workplace flow. However, major barriers to adoption include device security/patient confidentiality and patient safety. Furthermore, except for a policy published by the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) in 2018, there are few other national regulatory guidelines pertaining to handheld POCUS. In light of this, we propose a framework for HPOCUS guideline development to address these and other concerns. Such guidelines include training and credentialing, bioengineering approval, and strategic integration with electronic medical record systems. CONCLUSION: HPOCUS can be a powerful tool for expedited diagnosis and management guidance. However, there is limited data regarding patient safety and current regulatory body guidelines are lacking. Our assessment illuminates that there remain many unsolved problems about HPOCUS, and in turn, we propose guidelines to address safe regulation and implementation.
Authors: Alexander Y Sheng; Peregrine Dalziel; Andrew S Liteplo; Peter Fagenholz; Vicki E Noble Journal: Emerg Med Int Date: 2013-08-29 Impact factor: 1.112
Authors: Yogen Singh; Cecile Tissot; María V Fraga; Nadya Yousef; Rafael Gonzalez Cortes; Jorge Lopez; Joan Sanchez-de-Toledo; Joe Brierley; Juan Mayordomo Colunga; Dusan Raffaj; Eduardo Da Cruz; Philippe Durand; Peter Kenderessy; Hans-Joerg Lang; Akira Nishisaki; Martin C Kneyber; Pierre Tissieres; Thomas W Conlon; Daniele De Luca Journal: Crit Care Date: 2020-02-24 Impact factor: 9.097