Comparing accuracy of bedside ultrasound examination with physical examination for detection of pleural effusion

Abstract

Background In detecting pleural effusion, bedside ultrasound (US) has been shown to be more accurate than auscultation. However, US has not been previously compared to the comprehensive physical examination. This study seeks to compare the accuracy of physical examination with bedside US in detecting pleural effusion. Methods This study included a convenience sample of 34 medical inpatients from Calgary, Canada and Spokane, USA, with chest imaging performed within 24 h of recruitment. Imaging results served as the reference standard for pleural effusion. All patients underwent a comprehensive lung physical examination and a bedside US examination by two researchers blinded to the imaging results. Results Physical examination was less accurate than US (sensitivity of 44.0% [95% confidence interval (CI) 30.0–58.8%], specificity 88.9% (95% CI 65.3–98.6%), positive likelihood (LR) 3.96 (95% CI 1.03–15.18), negative LR 0.63 (95% CI 0.47–0.85) for physical examination; sensitivity 98% (95% CI 89.4–100%), specificity 94.4% (95% CI 72.7–99.9%), positive LR 17.6 (95% CI 2.6–118.6), negative LR 0.02 (95% CI 0.00–0.15) for US). The percentage of examinations rated with a confidence level of 4 or higher (out of 5) was higher for US (85% of the seated US examination and 94% of the supine US examination, compared to 35% of the PE, P < 0.001), and took less time to perform (P < 0.0001). Conclusions US examination for pleural effusion was more accurate than the physical examination, conferred higher confidence, and required less time to complete.

Comparing Point-Of-Care Ultrasound Versus CT scan for Pleural Effusion Detection in The Emergency Department of Baghdad Teaching Hospital

“…This section presents a comparative analysis with existing literature to underline the evolutionary trajectory and the pivotal role of POCUS in medical diagnostics, especially for pleural effusion. (34) conducted a comparative study focusing on the accuracy of bedside ultrasound examination against physical examination for pleural effusion detection. Their findings advocate for the superiority of ultrasound, aligning with the current study's demonstration of ultrasound's enhanced diagnostic capabilities.…”

Recent advancements in critical care: Part I

“…While a physical examination of the chest can provide information on probable lung pathology, ultrasonography, has shown better accuracy in detecting pathologies. [ 2 ] Therefore, it has gained value as a clinical evaluation tool, like a stethoscope for the heart and lungs, with added visual advantages.…”

Automatic deep learning-based pleural effusion segmentation in lung ultrasound images

“…While history taking, a physical examination remains the basis for evaluating patients with PE, the British Thoracic Society in its latest draft guideline on pleural disease [ 4 ] has included a recommendation on performing lung ultrasound (LUS) on every patient’s initial presentation and when procedures involving the pleura are being performed. LUS provides a higher accuracy than physical examination [ 5 ] and chest radiography in the detection of PE [ 6 ]. However, LUS assessment typically involves a highly trained and experienced operator acquiring the images using a well-outlined protocol [ 7 ] and interpreting the images for pattern changes associated with lung pathology.…”