Survey of point of care ultrasound usage in emergency medicine by <scp>V</scp>ietnamese physicians

Rice, Brian; Vu, Ha Thi Thu; Tran, Lai Duc; Vo, Quang Xuan; Mowafi, Hani

doi:10.1111/1742-6723.12476

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In identifying perceived barriers to POCUS use, lack of equipment and education were the highest rated by a significant margin with 56% of respondents ranking them as “very important.” These results are similar to the findings of other surveys of US use in Vietnam and Kenya 11,12 . A survey performed in India of participants in a 4‐day US course in 2010 reported that 97% had “potential access” to an US machine in the near future, but this selection of participants at an emergency US course may not be representative of emergency physicians across India 13 .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

“…These results are similar to the findings of other surveys of US use in Vietnam and Kenya. 11,12 A survey performed in India of participants in a 4-day US course in 2010 reported that 97% had "potential access" to an US machine in the near future, but this selection of participants at an emergency US course may not be representative of emergency physicians across India. 13 Lack of access to US equipment in India is problematic since in addition to the usual issues with acquiring hospital equipment (cost, institutional approval, etc.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Learner‐centered Survey of Point‐of‐care Ultrasound Training, Competence, and Implementation Barriers in Emergency Medicine Training Programs in India

Boniface

Drake

Pyle

et al. 2019

AEM Education and Training

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is important to the practice of emergency medicine (EM), but requires training to achieve competence. The purpose of this study was to describe the current state of POCUS practice and perceived barriers to the implementation in EM training programs in India. Methods: A cross-sectional survey consisting of 28 questions was administered to 378 faculty and residents in postgraduate EM training programs across India. Results: Data were collected from 159 physicians from 16 institutions; 76% of them were EM residents, with a response rate of 42%. Respondents overwhelmingly reported high interest (91%) in learning POCUS topics. Respondents identified highest levels of comfort with the performance and interpretation of trauma ultrasound (US) and echocardiography. Conversely, there was a scarce interest and low levels of competence in performing obstetric US, which may be a result of the practice of triaging these complaints to obstetricians and gynecologists. Lack of US equipment and dedicated training were the highest rated barriers by a significant margin, which 56% of respondents ranked as "very important." Conclusions: While significant interest in POCUS exists among the Indian EM physicians, comfort and competence were limited to trauma and echocardiography applications. Expansion of and comfort with POCUS use in these settings may be sought through improvement of access to US equipment and a dedicated US curriculum. P oint-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has become a widely available and essential tool in the practice of emergency medicine (EM). Its importance in the field is demonstrated by its inclusion in the Model of Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine as an "integral diagnostic procedure," 1 and it is now a recognized part of the curriculum in most EM residencies in the United States with dedicated didactics, clinical rotations, and evaluations of competency. 2

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learner‐centered Survey of Point‐of‐care Ultrasound Training, Competence, and Implementation Barriers in Emergency Medicine Training Programs in India

Boniface

Drake

Pyle

et al. 2019

AEM Education and Training

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this study however, we found that male physicians used ultrasound more than their female colleagues. Other studies have also shown this, suggesting that male physicians are more likely to be early adopters of ultrasound [9,17]. Noteworthy, one study found that females felt they required more training compared to males to start using POCUS [18].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Point-of-care ultrasonography in Norwegian out-of-hours primary health care

Myhr

Sandvik

Morken

et al. 2017

Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to determine the extent of ultrasound availability in Norwegian casualty clinics and estimate the prevalence of its use.DesignA retrospective study based on a national casualty clinic registry and data from reimbursement claims.SettingOut-of-hours primary health care in Norway.SubjectsAll Norwegian casualty clinics in 2016 and reimbursement claims from 2008 to 2015.Main outcome measuresPercent of casualty clinics with ultrasound, types of ultrasound devices and probes, reasons for/against ultrasound access, characteristics of clinics with/without ultrasound, frequency of five ultrasound indications and characteristics of the physicians using/not using ultrasound.ResultsOut of 182 casualty clinics, 41 (23%) reported access to ultrasound. Mobile (49%) and stationary (44%) devices were most frequent. Physician request was the most common cited reason for ultrasound access (66%). Neither population served by the casualty clinic nor distance to hospital showed any clear association with ultrasound access. All of the five ultrasound reimbursement codes showed a substantial increase from 2008 to 2015 with 14.1 ultrasound examinations being performed per 10,000 consultations in 2015. Only 6.5% of physicians performed ultrasound in 2015 and males were significantly more likely to use ultrasound than females (OR 1.85, 95% CI: 1.38–2.47, p < .001), even when adjusted for age, speciality status and geography.ConclusionsAlthough the use of ultrasound is increasing in out-of-hours Norwegian primary health care, most casualty clinics do not have access and only a minority of physicians use ultrasound.

show abstract

“…Critical care ultrasonography (CCUS) is a deliberately focused examination, aimed at rapidly answering straightforward clinical questions [1]. In the field of emergency and critical care medicine, CCUS is increasingly used to guide interventions in critically ill patients in various settings by experts and novices [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14]. The training process required for users to attain competency in CCUS has varied widely between studies, reflecting the diversity in CCUS training between centers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feasibility of cardiac output measurements in critically ill patients by medical students

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Critical care ultrasonography (CCUS) is increasingly applied also in the intensive care unit (ICU) and performed by non-experts, including even medical students. There is limited data on the training efforts necessary for novices to attain images of sufficient quality. There is no data on medical students performing CCUS for the measurement of cardiac output (CO), a hemodynamic variable of importance for daily critical care. Objective: The aim of this study was to explore the agreement of cardiac output measurements as well as the quality of images obtained by medical students in critically ill patients compared to the measurements obtained by experts in these images. Methods: In a prospective observational cohort study, all acutely admitted adults with an expected ICU stay over 24 h were included. CCUS was performed by students within 24 h of admission. CCUS included the images required to measure the CO, i.e., the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) diameter and the velocity time integral (VTI) in the LVOT. Echocardiography experts were involved in the evaluation of the quality of images obtained and the quality of the CO measurements. Results: There was an opportunity for a CCUS attempt in 1155 of the 1212 eligible patients (95%) and in 1075 of the 1212 patients (89%) CCUS examination was performed by medical students. In 871 out of 1075 patients (81%) medical students measured CO. Experts measured CO in 783 patients (73%). In 760 patients (71%) CO was measured by both which allowed for comparison; bias of CO was 0.0 L min −1 with limits of agreement of − 2.6 L min −1 to 2.7 L min −1. The percentage error was 50%, reflecting poor agreement of the CO measurement by students compared with the experts CO measurement. Conclusions: Medical students seem capable of obtaining sufficient quality CCUS images for CO measurement in the majority of critically ill patients. Measurements of CO by medical students, however, had poor agreement with expert measurements. Experts remain indispensable for reliable CO measurements.

show abstract

Survey of point of care ultrasound usage in emergency medicine by Vietnamese physicians

Cited by 4 publications

References 11 publications

Learner‐centered Survey of Point‐of‐care Ultrasound Training, Competence, and Implementation Barriers in Emergency Medicine Training Programs in India

Learner‐centered Survey of Point‐of‐care Ultrasound Training, Competence, and Implementation Barriers in Emergency Medicine Training Programs in India

Point-of-care ultrasonography in Norwegian out-of-hours primary health care

Feasibility of cardiac output measurements in critically ill patients by medical students

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About