Objectives Computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) is the diagnostic standard for pulmonary embolism (PE), but is unavailable in many low resource settings. We evaluated the evidence for point of care ultrasound as an alternative diagnostic. Methods Using a PROSPERO-registered, protocol-driven strategy (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/ PROSPERO, ID = CRD42018099925), we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINHAL for observational and clinical trials of cardiopulmonary ultrasound (CPUS) for PE. We included English-language studies of adult patients with acute breathlessness, reported according to PRISMA guidelines published in the last two decades (January 2000 to February 2020). The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy of CPUS compared to reference standard CTPA for detection of PE in acutely breathless adults. Results We identified 260 unique publications of which twelve met all inclusion criteria. Of these, seven studies (N = 3872) were suitable for inclusion in our meta-analysis for diagnostic accuracy (two using CTPA and five using clinically derived diagnosis criterion). Meta-analysis of data demonstrated that using cardiopulmonary ultrasound (CPUS) was 91% sensitive and 81% specific for pulmonary embolism diagnosis compared to diagnostic standard CTPA. When compared to clinically derived diagnosis criterion, CPUS was 52% sensitive
Objectives: Acute breathlessness is a common and distressing symptom experienced by patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). Adoption of clinician-performed bedside ultrasound could promote accurate, early diagnosis and treatment to acutely breathless patients. This may be particularly pertinent in low resource settings with limited human resources and lack of access to advanced (gold standard) diagnostic testing. The aim of the study was to explore the experience of point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) users in the emergency department, and to understand the facilitators and constraints of PoCUS incorporation into patient investigation pathways. Materials and Methods: This was an exploratory qualitative study. Data collection entailed key informant interviews using a semi-structured interview guide between September 2019 and February 2020. Participants were purposively sampled according to role and responsibility in the acute care system at Kenyatta National Hospital, including front-line health practitioners and mid-level clinical hospital managers. Data collection proceeded until no new concepts emerged (thematic saturation). The analytical framework method was used for the thematic analysis of interview transcripts. Results: At individual level, the lack of training on the use of PoCUS, as well as fears and beliefs impacted on capability and motivation of the clinicians to perform PoCUS for clinical diagnosis. Hospital level influencers such as hospital norms, workloads, and staffing influenced the use of PoCUS by impacting on the clinician’s capability, motivation, and opportunity. General health system influencers such as relationships and power dynamics between clinical specialties and key stakeholders, and the lack of policy and practice guidelines challenged the uptake of the bedside ultrasound by the clinicians. Conclusion: Lack of PoCUS training for clinicians, limited resources and a fragmented health system structure impacted the clinician’s capability, motivation, and opportunity in performing PoCUS in diagnostics. PoCUS for diagnosis of acute breathlessness requires: (1) Well-maintained and accessible equipment; (2) highly trained individuals with time to perform the examination with access to ongoing support for the operators; and (3) finally, researchers must more accurately identify the optimal scope of ultrasound examination, the diagnostic benefits, and the opportunity costs. All three will be required to ensure patient’s benefit.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.