Why the study?
Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) of the kidney and bladder is common in rural New Zealand, but its quality, safety, and effect on patient care needed evaluation.
Does point-of-care ultrasound of the kidney and bladder improve diagnostic certainty and patient care in rural settings?
Does point-of-care ultrasound of the kidney and bladder improve diagnostic certainty and patient care in rural settings?
Point-of-care ultrasound of the kidney and bladder performed by rural doctors is highly accurate for detecting urinary retention and hydronephrosis, positively impacting patient management.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support POCUS for urinary retention and hydronephrosis in rural care; leaves open broader adoption pending prospective validation.
INTRODUCTION Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) of the kidney and bladder are among the most commonly performed POCUS scans in rural New Zealand (NZ). AIM To determine the quality, safety and effect on patient care of POCUS of the kidney and bladder in rural NZ. METHODS Overall, 28 doctors in six NZ rural hospitals completed a questionnaire both before and after undertaking a POCUS scan over a 9-month period. The clinical records and saved ultrasound images were reviewed by a specialist panel. RESULTS The 28 participating doctors undertook 138 kidney and 60 bladder scans during the study. POCUS of the bladder as a test for urinary retention had a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI 88-100) and specificity of 100% (95% CI 93-100). POCUS of the kidney as a test for hydronephrosis had a sensitivity 90% (95% CI 74-96) and specificity of 96% (95% CI 89-98). The accuracy of other findings such as renal stones and bladder clot was lower. POCUS of the bladder appeared to have made a positive contribution to patient care in 92% of cases without evidence of harm. POCUS of the kidney benefited 93% of cases, although in three cases (2%), it may have had a negative effect on patient care. DISCUSSION POCUS as a test for urinary retention and hydronephrosis in the hands of rural doctors was technically straightforward, improved diagnostic certainty, increased discharges and overall had a positive effect on patient care.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nixon et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: