Introduction Lung ultrasound (LUS) has an established evidence base and has proven useful in previous viral epidemics. An understanding of the utility of LUS in COVID-19 is crucial to determine its most suitable role based on local circumstances. Method Online databases, specialist websites and social media platforms were searched to identify studies that explore the utility of LUS in COVID-19. Case reports and recommendations were excluded. Findings In total, 33 studies were identified which represent a rapidly expanding evidence base for LUS in COVID-19. The quality of the included studies was relatively low; however, LUS certainly appears to be a highly sensitive and fairly specific test for COVID-19 in all ages and in pregnancy. Discussion There may be LUS findings and patterns that are relatively specific to COVID-19; however, specificity may also be influenced by factors such as disease severity, pre-existing lung disease, operator experience, disease prevalence and the reference standard. Conclusion LUS is almost certainly more sensitive than chest radiograph for COVID-19 and has several advantages over computed tomography and real-time polymerase chain reaction. High-quality research is needed into various aspects of LUS including: diagnostic accuracy in undifferentiated patients; triage and prognostication; monitoring progression and guiding interventions; the persistence of residual LUS findings; inter-observer agreement and the role of contrast-enhanced LUS.

Lung ultrasound (LUS) has an established evidence base and has proven useful in previous viral epidemics. An understanding of the utility of LUS in COVID-19 is crucial to determine its most suitable role based on local circumstances. A scoping review was thus undertaken to explore the utility of LUS in COVID-19 and guide future research. 33 studies were identified which represent a rapidly expanding evidence base for LUS in COVID-19. The quality of the included studies was relatively low. However LUS appears to be a highly sensitive and fairly specific test for COVID-19 in all ages and in pregnancy and is almost certainly more sensitive than CXR. The precise diagnostic accuracy of LUS may be influenced by various factors including disease severity, pre-existing lung disease, scanning protocol, operator experience, disease prevalence and the reference standard. High quality research is needed in various fields including: diagnostic accuracy in undifferentiated patients; triage and prognostication; monitoring progression and guiding interventions; persistence of residual LUS findings; inter-observer agreement; and the role of contrast-enhanced LUS.

Aims To evaluate the evidence and produce a summary and recommendations for the most common heart and lung applications of point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS). Methods We reviewed 10 clinical domains/questions related to common heart and lung applications of PoCUS. Following review of the evidence, a summary and recommendation were produced, including assignment of levels of evidence (LoE) and grading of the recommendation, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE). 38 international experts, the expert review group (ERG), were invited to review the evidence presented for each question. A level of agreement of over 75 % was required to progress to the next section. The ERG then reviewed and indicated their level of agreement regarding the summary and recommendation for each question (using a 5-point Likert scale), which was approved if a level of agreement of greater than 75 % was reached. A level of agreement was defined as a summary of “strongly agree” and “agree” on the Likert scale responses. Findings and Recommendations One question achieved a strong consensus for an assigned LoE of 3 and a weak GRADE recommendation (question 1). The remaining 9 questions achieved broad agreement with one assigned an LoE of 4 and weak GRADE recommendation (question 2), three achieving an LoE of 3 with a weak GRADE recommendation (questions 3–5), three achieved an LoE of 3 with a strong GRADE recommendation (questions 6–8), and the remaining two were assigned an LoE of 2 with a strong GRADE recommendation (questions 9 and 10). Conclusion These consensus-derived recommendations should aid clinical practice and highlight areas of further research for PoCUS in acute settings.