Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27399134›Full record

ArticleMedicine2016

Lung ultrasound and chest x-ray for detecting pneumonia in an acute geriatric ward.

Andrea Ticinesi, Fulvio Lauretani, Antonio Nouvenne, Giulia Mori, Giulia Chiussi, Marcello Maggio, Tiziana Meschi

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 112 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Point-of-care lung ultrasound in detecting pneumonia: A systematic review.Canadian journal of respiratory therapy : CJRT = Revue canadienne de la therapie respiratoire : RCTR · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Recommendations for Lung Ultrasound in Internal Medicine.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Andrea TicinesiInternal Medicine and Critical Subacute Care Unit, Geriatric-Rehabilitation Department, University Hospital of Parma Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Parma, Parma, Italy.
Fulvio Lauretani
Antonio Nouvenne
Giulia Mori
Giulia Chiussi
Marcello Maggio
Tiziana Meschi
Statistical Research (United States) · USUniversity of Parma · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOur aim was to compare the accuracy of lung ultrasound (LUS) and standard chest x-ray (CXR) for diagnosing pneumonia in older patients with acute respiratory symptoms (dyspnea, cough, hemoptysis, and atypical chest pain) admitted to an acute-care geriatric ward.

methodsWe enrolled 169 (80 M, 89 F) multimorbid patients aged 83.0 ± 9.2 years from January 1 to October 31, 2015. Each participant underwent CXR and bedside LUS within 6 hours from ward admission. LUS was performed by skilled clinicians, blinded to CXR results and clinical history. The final diagnosis (pneumonia vs no-pneumonia) was established by another clinician reviewing clinical and laboratory data independent of LUS results and possibly prescribing chest contrast-enhanced CT. Diagnostic parameters of CXR and LUS were compared with McNemar test on the whole cohort and after stratification for Rockwood Clinical Frailty Scale.

resultsDiagnostic accuracy for pneumonia (96 patients) was significantly higher in LUS (0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.83-0.96) compared with CXR (0.67, 95%CI 0.60-0.74, P < 0.001). LUS had a better sensitivity (0.92, 95%CI 0.86-0.97 vs 0.47, 95%CI 0.37-0.57) and negative predictive value (0.95, 95% CI 0.83-0.96 vs 0.57, 95%CI 0.48-0.56). In those patients with frailty (n = 87 with Rockwood Clinical Frailty Scale ≥5), LUS maintained a high diagnostic accuracy, but CXR did not (P = 0.0003). Interobserver agreement for LUS, calculated in a subsample of 29 patients, was high (k = 0.90).

conclusionsIn multimorbid patients admitted to an acute geriatric ward, LUS was more accurate than CXR for the diagnosis of pneumonia, particularly in those with frailty. A wider use of LUS should be implemented in this setting.

Indexed as

Radiography, ThoracicUltrasonographyAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleGeriatricsHospital DepartmentsHumansLungMalePneumoniaProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID27399134
PMCPMC5058863
OpenAlexW2461690170

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.