Background Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) machines may utilize artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance image interpretation and acquisition. This study investigates whether AI-enabled devices improve competency among POCUS novices. Methods We conducted a randomized controlled trial at a single academic institution from 2021-2022. Internal medicine trainees (N=43) with limited POCUS experience were randomized to receive a POCUS device with (Echonous, N=22) or without (Butterfly, N=21) AI-functionality for two weeks while on an inpatient rotation. The AI-device provided automatic labeling of cardiac structures, guidance for optimal probe placement to acquire cardiac views, and ejection fraction estimations. Participants were allowed to use the devices at their discretion for patient-related care. The primary outcome was the time to acquire an apical 4-chamber (A4C) image. Secondary outcomes included A4C image quality using the modified Rapid Assessment for Competency in Echocardiography (RACE) scale, correct identification of pathology, and participant attitudes. Measurements were performed at the time of randomization and at two-week follow-up. All scanning assessments were performed on the same standardized patient. Results Both AI and non-AI groups had similar scan times and image quality scores at baseline. At follow-up, the AI group had faster scan times (72 seconds [IQR 38-85] vs. 85 seconds [IQR 54-166]; p=0.01), higher image quality scores (4.5 [IQR 2-5.5] vs. 2 [IQR 1-3]; p<0.01) and correctly identified reduced systolic function more often (85% vs 50%; p=0.02) compared to the non-AI group. Trust in the AI features did not differ between the groups pre- or post-intervention. The AI group did not report increased confidence in their abilities to obtain or interpret cardiac images. Conclusions POCUS devices with AI features may improve image acquisition and interpretation by novices. Future studies are needed to determine the extent that AI impacts POCUS learning.
Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused an unprecedented challenge for in-vitro fertilization (IVF) patients. The incidence of COVID-19 infection among this population is a fundamental knowledge gap. Objective The purpose of this study was to determine the rate of COVID-19 infection among IVF patients compared to other gynecologic surgery patients. Materials and methods This retrospective study evaluated the incidence of COVID-19 infection among patients undergoing IVF, female fertility-related surgeries (FRS) and other gynecologic surgeries at a single academic institution in Los Angeles, California. All patients underwent routine COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) screening prior to treatment. Result A total of 2742 patients underwent asymptomatic COVID-19 screening before a surgical procedure or IVF between March 1, 2020, and April 5, 2021. The rate of COVID-19 infection among patients who underwent preoperative testing for a non-fertility-related gynecologic procedure was 1.74% (28/1612). In comparison, the positive test results for those who underwent either FRS or IVF were 0.56% (1/180) and 0.34% (1/290), respectively, representing 6.70% (2/30) of positive tests for the whole cohort. The infertility patients had a significantly lower positivity rate compared to the other gynecologic patients during preoperative COVID-19 testing (0.43% vs 1.74%, p = 0.03). Conclusion(s). Our study demonstrated that there was a significantly lower incidence of COVID-19 infections in infertility patients undergoing IVF or FRS compared to other gynecologic surgery patients. Future studies should evaluate the cost-effectiveness of routine screening in both the gynecology and infertility patient population, especially in the setting of different variant surges and vaccination rates. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10815-022-02581-2.
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.