PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
August 4, 2011European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging43 citationsOpen Access

Diagnostic influence of cardiovascular screening by pocket-size ultrasound in a cardiac unit

View Full Paper
KSKyrre SkjetneTGTorbjørn GravenBHBjørn Olav Haugen

Key Result

Routine cardiovascular screening using a pocket-size ultrasound device corrected the primary diagnosis in 16% of patients and had an important diagnostic influence in 55% of participants.

Study Design

Type

Cross-Sectional (n=119)

Multicenter

No

Structured PICO

Does routine cardiovascular screening by pocket-size ultrasound improve diagnostic accuracy in patients admitted to a cardiac unit?

P
Population
119 randomly selected patients admitted to a cardiac unit at a non-university hospital
I
Intervention
Routine cardiovascular ultrasound screening of the cardiac anatomy and function, pericardium, pleura, and abdominal great vessels using a pocket-size ultrasound device (pUS) with grey scale and colour Doppler imaging
C
Comparator
Standard diagnostic assessment without pocket-size ultrasound screening
O
Outcome
Diagnostic influence (correction of primary diagnosis, verification of primary diagnosis, or making an additional important diagnosis)surrogate

Routine use of pocket-size ultrasound in cardiac units significantly impacts clinical management by correcting or refining the primary diagnosis in over half of admitted patients.

Abstract

AIMS: We aimed to study the diagnostic influence of adding a routine cardiovascular ultrasound screening of the cardiac anatomy and function, the pericardium, the pleura and the abdominal great vessels by the new pocket-size ultrasound device (pUS) with grey scale and colour Doppler imaging. METHODS AND RESULTS: In 119 randomly selected patients admitted to a cardiac unit at a non-university hospital, routinely adding a cardiovascular ultrasonography of only 4.4 min with a pocket-size device corrected the primary diagnosis in 16% of patients. In addition, 29% had the primary diagnosis verified and in 10% an additional important diagnosis was made. Higher age predicted any diagnostic influence of pUS screening with an increase of 61% (P=0.003) per 10 years of higher age. Overall, the pUS screening had a sensitivity and specificity with respect to detecting at least moderate pathology of 97 and 93%. Positive and negative predictive values were 93 and 87%, respectively. In the sub-group of subjects with a change in the primary diagnosis following pUS there was no false-negative or false-positive findings. CONCLUSION: Screening by pUS assessed vascular and cardiac anatomy and function accurately and enabled correction of the diagnosis in 16% of patients admitted to a cardiac unit. In 55% of the participants, the cardiovascular ultrasound screening had important diagnostic influence. We suggest that it would be appropriate to implement strategies and systems for routinely adding an ultrasound cardiovascular examination to patients in cardiac units.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Skjetne et al. (2011) conducted a cross-sectional in Patients admitted to a cardiac unit (n=119). Pocket-size ultrasound device (pUS) screening was evaluated on Correction of primary diagnosis. Routine cardiovascular screening using a pocket-size ultrasound device corrected the primary diagnosis in 16% of patients and had an important diagnostic influence in 55% of participants.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1c44380a1f7575939dc257https://doi.org/10.1093/ejechocard/jer111
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper