Background
Lung ultrasound (LUS) has received considerable interest in the clinical evaluation of patients with COVID‐19. Previously described LUS manifestations for COVID‐19 include B‐lines, consolidations, and pleural thickening. The interrater reliability (IRR) of these findings for COVID‐19 is unknown.
Methods
This study was conducted between March and June 2020. Nine physicians (hospitalists:
n
= 4; emergency medicine:
n
= 5) from 3 medical centers independently evaluated
n
= 20 LUS scans (
n
= 180 independent observations) collected from patients with COVID‐19, diagnosed via RT‐PCR. These studies were randomly selected from an image database consisting of COVID‐19 patients evaluated in the emergency department with portable ultrasound devices. Physicians were blinded to any patient information or previous LUS interpretation. Kappa values (
κ
) were used to calculate IRR.
Results
There was substantial IRR on the following items: normal LUS scan (
κ
= 0.79 [95% CI: 0.72–0.87]), presence of B‐lines (
κ
= 0.79 [95% CI: 0.72–0.87]), ≥3 B‐lines observed (
κ
= 0.72 [95% CI: 0.64–0.79]). Moderate IRR was observed for the presence of any consolidation (
κ
= 0.57 [95% CI: 0.50–0.64]), subpleural consolidation (
κ
= 0.49 [95% CI: 0.42–0.56]), and presence of effusion (
κ
= 0.49 [95% CI: 0.41–0.56]). Fair IRR was observed for pleural thickening (
κ
= 0.23 [95% CI: 0.15–0.30]).
Discussion
Many LUS manifestations for COVID‐19 appear to have moderate to substantial IRR across providers from multiple specialties utilizing differing portable devices.
The most reliable LUS findings with COVID‐19 may include the presence/count of B‐lines or determining if a scan is normal. Clinical protocols for LUS with COVID‐19 may require additional observers for the confirmation of less reliable findings such as consolidations.
Background: Lung ultrasound (LUS) may be used in the diagnostic evaluation of patients with COVID-19. An abnormal LUS is associated with increased risk for ICU admission in COVID-19. Previously described LUS manifestations for COVID-19 include B-lines, consolidations, and pleural thickening. The interrater reliability (IRR) of these findings for COVID-19 is unknown.
Research Question: What is the interrater reliability of lung ultrasound findings in patients with RT-PCR confirmed COVID-19?
Study Design and Methods: This study was conducted at conducted at two academic medical centers between 03/2020-06/2020. Nine physicians (hospitalists: n=4; emergency medicine: n=5) independently evaluated n=20 LUS scans (n=180 independent observations) collected from RT-PCR confirmed COVID-19 patients. These studies were randomly selected from an image database consisting of COVID-19 patients evaluated in the emergency department with portable ultrasound devices. Physicians were blinded to any patient information or previous LUS interpretation. Kappa values were used to calculate IRR.
Results: There was substantial IRR on the following items: normal LUS scan (K=0.79 [95% CI: 0.72-0.87]), presence of B-lines (K=0.79 [95% CI: 0.72-0.87]), >=3 B-lines observed (K=0.72 [95% CI: 0.64-0.79]). Moderate IRR was observed for the presence of any consolidation (K=0.57 [95% CI: 0.50-0.64]), subpleural consolidation (K=0.49 [95% CI: 0.42-0.56]), and presence of effusion (K=0.49 [95% CI: 0.41-0.56]). Fair IRR was observed for pleural thickening (K=0.23 [95% CI: 0.15-0.30]).
Interpretation: Many LUS manifestations for COVID-19 appear to have moderate to substantial IRR across providers from multiple specialties utilizing differing portable devices.
The most reliable LUS findings with COVID-19 may include the presence/count of B-lines or determining if a scan is normal. Clinical protocols for LUS with COVID-19 may require additional observers for the confirmation of less reliable findings such as consolidations.
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.