Key result
Hand-carried ultrasound use by hospitalist physicians lacks sufficient evidence from studies with patient-centered outcomes to justify its expanded clinical utilization.
Why the study?
Does the use of hand-carried ultrasound by hospitalists improve clinical outcomes and efficiency?
Does the use of hand-carried ultrasound by hospitalists improve clinical outcomes and efficiency?
There is currently insufficient evidence to support the widespread use of hand-carried ultrasound by hospitalists due to a lack of patient-centered outcomes and undefined training requirements.
In the right hands, ultrasound is a safe and helpful diagnostic imaging tool. However, evidence supporting the use of hand-carried ultrasound (HCU) by hospitalist physicians has not kept pace with expanding application of these devices. In spite of its strategic point-of-care benefit, use of this technology by hospitalists may not ultimately translate into improved efficiency and better clinical outcomes. Optimal levels of training in image acquisition and interpretation remain to be established. Novelty, availability, and the results of a few small studies lacking patient-centered outcomes remain insufficient grounds to justify the expanded clinical utilization of these medical imaging devices by nonspecialists.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Feldman et al. (2010) reported an editorial. Hand-carried ultrasound (HCU) was evaluated. Hand-carried ultrasound use by hospitalist physicians lacks sufficient evidence from studies with patient-centered outcomes to justify its expanded clinical utilization.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: