Comparison of four handheld point-of-care ultrasound devices by expert users

Abstract

Background Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is rapidly becoming ubiquitous across healthcare specialties. This is due to several factors including its portability, immediacy of results to guide clinical decision-making, and lack of radiation exposure to patients. The recent growth of handheld ultrasound devices has improved access to ultrasound for many clinicians. Few studies have directly compared different handheld ultrasound devices among themselves or to cart-based ultrasound machines. We conducted a prospective observational study comparing four common handheld ultrasound devices for ease of use, image quality, and overall satisfaction. Twenty-four POCUS experts utilized four handheld devices (Butterfly iQ+™ by Butterfly Network Inc., Kosmos™ by EchoNous, Vscan Air™ by General Electric, and Lumify™ by Philips Healthcare) to obtain three ultrasound views on the same standardized patients using high- and low-frequency probes. Results Data were collected from 24 POCUS experts using all 4 handheld devices. No single ultrasound device was superior in all categories. For overall ease of use, the Vscan Air™ was rated highest, followed by the Lumify™. For overall image quality, Lumify™ was rated highest, followed by Kosmos™. The Lumify™ device was rated highest for overall satisfaction, while the Vscan Air™ was rated as the most likely to be purchased personally and carried in one’s coat pocket. The top 5 characteristics of handheld ultrasound devices rated as being “very important” were image quality, ease of use, portability, total costs, and availability of different probes. Conclusions In a comparison of four common handheld ultrasound devices in the United States, no single handheld ultrasound device was perceived to have all desired characteristics. POCUS experts rated the Lumify™ highest for image quality and Vscan Air™ highest for ease of use. Overall satisfaction was highest with the Lumify™ device, while the most likely to be purchased as a pocket device was the Vscan Air™. Image quality was felt to be the most important characteristic in evaluating handheld ultrasound devices.

Wireless handheld focused ultrasound in student teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic: Initial results of a pilot study1

“…By means of the Vscan Air™, because of the small size of the device, high ease of use and wireless image transmission to a monitor that is not positionally fixed [1,13], the above-mentioned problems can be reduced. The Vscan Air™ device has already been described in other studies as a fundamentally effective model [1,9,14], but the device also can be used to perform more difficult examinations, such as duplex examination of the veins to exclude thrombosis [9].…”

Instant Endocarditis Diagnosis Using Point-of-Care Ultrasound (POCUS) in a Patient Diagnosed With Pneumonia

“…Compared to transesophageal echo (TEE), transthoracic echo (TTE) has low sensitivity for detecting endocarditis. This sensitivity is limited by body habitus, available cardiac windows, and further limited with a POCUS exam due to generally lower resolution images [ 5 ]. However, the specificity is over 90%, so when a mobile mass is detected, it is very likely due to endocarditis.…”

Tele-ultrasound imaging using smartphones and single-board PCs

“…В настоящее время существуют портативные УЗ-системы для проведения ультразвуковых исследований, в том числе с функцией передачи изображения (телеУЗИ), например Butterfly iQ+Butterfly Network Inc., Kosmos EchoNous, Vscan Air General Electric и Lumif Philips Healthcare, однако эти системы дорогостоящие (от 500 000 рублей) и не обладают всеми качествами, необходимыми для полноценного исследования на стационарном УЗ-сканере [18]. Преимуществом предлагаемого нами подхода является использование ультразвукового оборудования, входящего в стандарт оснащения кабинета ультразвуковой диагностики.…”