Mp30-05 Comparative Analysis of Current Versus Perceived Optimized Use of Point-of-Care Ultrasound in Urology

You have accessJournal of UrologyImaging/Uroradiology II (MP30)1 May 2024MP30-05 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF CURRENT VERSUS PERCEIVED OPTIMIZED USE OF POINT-OF-CARE ULTRASOUND IN UROLOGY Charles H. Schlaepfer, Zubin Shetty, Chad R. Tracy, Vignesh T. Packiam, Elizabeth Takacs, and Ryan L. Steinberg Charles H. SchlaepferCharles H. Schlaepfer , Zubin ShettyZubin Shetty , Chad R. TracyChad R. Tracy , Vignesh T. PackiamVignesh T. Packiam , Elizabeth TakacsElizabeth Takacs , and Ryan L. SteinbergRyan L. Steinberg View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0001009416.90901.7b.05AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is a valuable tool for clinicians with multiple benefits, including lack of ionizing radiation, portability, and real time results. Yet, implementation into urology practices has been slow, at best. While there is plentiful evidence supporting the merits of POCUS, there are no studies assessing contemporary practice patterns or perceived optimal POCUS utilization. We now aim to assess this amongst North American urologists. METHODS: An IRB-approved survey was developed and disseminated to 6 of 8 AUA sub-section by email. Data including demographics, prior training, current ultrasound utilization, and perceived optimal POCUS utilization was collected. Perceived optimal use was defined as a positive response to questions regarding when "POCUS is the most useful" (Table 1). Data was collected via the University of Iowa RedCap system (NIH CTSA UL1TR002537). Descriptive statistics and Chi squared analyses were performed (p10 years practice experience. Most respondents (77%) used some form of POCUS in practice but only 37% had prior formal training. When considering organ-specific POCUS, significant disparities between perceived optimal use and current use were noted for renal (optimal 88% vs current 58%), testes (74% vs 37%), and penile (37% vs 19%) studies (Table 2). These changes did not appear to be driven by those who are not current POCUS users. Similar differences were also seen in both diagnostic (81 vs 52%, p<0.01) and therapeutic (24 vs 9%, p<0.01) based utilization. Finally, the emergency room was the only setting in which perceived optimal use differed from current use (39% vs 16%, p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: POCUS appears to be underutilized in various aspects of urologic practice. Exploring means for increased POCUS training, particularly in diagnostic ultrasound focused on the kidneys, testes and penis, is warranted. Source of Funding: None © 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211Issue 5SMay 2024Page: e492 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Charles H. Schlaepfer More articles by this author Zubin Shetty More articles by this author Chad R. Tracy More articles by this author Vignesh T. Packiam More articles by this author Elizabeth Takacs More articles by this author Ryan L. Steinberg More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...