Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26450846›Full record

ArticleInternal and emergency medicine2015

Economic analysis of bedside ultrasonography (US) implementation in an Internal Medicine department.

Americo Testa, Andrea Francesconi, Rosangela Giannuzzi, Silvia Berardi, Paolo Sbraccia

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Internal and emergency medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The POCUS Imperative.Journal of graduate medical education · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Americo TestaInternal Medicine Unit, "Madonna delle Grazie" Clinic, viale S. D'Acquisto 67, 00040, Velletri (Rome), Italy. americotesta@gmail.com.
Andrea FrancesconiDepartment of Economics and Management, University of Trento, via Calepina, 14, 38122, Trento, Italy.
Rosangela GiannuzziEmergency Medicine Department, "A. Gemelli" University Hospital, l.go A. Gemelli 8, 00168, Rome, Italy.
Silvia BerardiInternal Medicine Unit, "A. Fiorini" Hospital, via Firenze 1, 04019, Terracina (LT), Italy.
Paolo SbracciaDepartment of Systems Medicine, University of Rome "Tor Vergata", Via Montpellier 1, 00133, Rome, Italy.
Agostino Gemelli University Polyclinic · ITPoliclinico Tor Vergata · ITUniversity of Trento · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The economic crisis, the growing healthcare demand, and Defensive Medicine wastefulness, strongly recommend the restructuring of the entire medical network. New health technology, such as bedside ultrasonography, might successfully integrate the clinical approach optimizing the use of limited resources, especially in a person-oriented vision of medicine. Bedside ultrasonography is a safe and reliable technique, with worldwide expanding employment in various clinical settings, being considered as "the stethoscope of the 21st century". However, at present, bedside ultrasonography lacks economic analysis. We performed a Cost-Benefit Analysis "ex ante", with a break-even point computing, of bedside ultrasonography implementation in an Internal Medicine department in the mid-term. Number and kind estimation of bedside ultrasonographic studies were obtained by a retrospective study, whose data results were applied to the next 3-year period (foresight study). All 1980 foreseen bedside examinations, with prevailing multiorgan ultrasonographic studies, were considered to calculate direct and indirect costs, while specific and generic revenues were considered only after the first semester. Physician professional training, equipment purchase and working time represented the main fixed and variable cost items. DRG increase/appropriateness, hospitalization stay shortening and reduction of traditional ultrasonography examination requests mainly impacted on calculated revenues. The break-even point, i.e. the volume of activity at which revenues exactly equal total incurred costs, was calculated to be 734 US examinations, corresponding to € 81,998 and the time considered necessary to reach it resulting 406 days. Our economic analysis clearly shows that bedside ultrasonography implementation in clinical daily management of an Internal Medicine department can produce consistent savings, or economic profit according to managerial choices (i.e., considering public or private targets), other than evident medical benefits.

Indexed as

Costs and Cost AnalysisHospital DepartmentsHumansInternal MedicineItalyPoint-of-Care SystemsRetrospective StudiesUltrasonographyBedside ultrasonographyCosts benefit analysisEchoscopyEconomic analysisInternal MedicinePoint of care ultrasonography

Identifiers

PMID26450846
OpenAlexW1947025234

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.