ArticleBMJ open2019
Primary care physicians' access to in-house ultrasound examinations across Europe: a questionnaire study.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Role of point-of-care ultrasound study in early disposition of patients with undifferentiated acute dyspnea in emergency department: a multi-center prospective study.Journal of ultrasound · 2022Trial
- Point-of-care ultrasound in primary care - EFSUMB core curriculum and training recommendations - a position paper.Ultraschall in der Medizin (Stuttgart, Germany : 1980) · 2026Article
- A core curriculum of point-of-care ultrasound examinations for frontline physicians in primary care: results from a European Delphi study.Ultraschall in der Medizin (Stuttgart, Germany : 1980) · 2026Article
- Frequency of clinical conditions suitable for point-of-care ultrasound and comparison of patient management plans among ultrasound users and non-users in Danish general practice.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- The use of diagnostic ultrasound by primary care physicians in Switzerland - a cross-sectional study.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Factors affecting point-of-care ultrasound implementation in general practice: a survey in Danish primary care clinics.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Ultrasound assessment of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia: a literature review for the primary care physician.Annals of medicine · 2022Review
- Learning strategies of general practitioners striving to achieve point-of-care ultrasound competence: a qualitative study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2022Article
- A cost-minimisation analysis of performing point-of-care ultrasonography on patients with vaginal bleeding in early pregnancy in general practice: a decision analytical model.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Patients' experiences of the use of point-of-care ultrasound in general practice - a cross-sectional study.BMC family practice · 2021Observational
- Use and impact of point-of-care ultrasonography in general practice: a prospective observational study.BMJ open · 2020Observational
- The use of ultrasound in primary care: longitudinal billing and cross-sectional survey study in Switzerland.BMC family practice · 2020Article
- Is there a place for point-of-care ultrasound in UK primary care?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2020Article
- A Clinician's Guide to the Implementation of Point-of-Care Ultrasound (POCUS) in the Outpatient Practice.Journal of primary care & community healthReview
- Patient Perspectives on Point-of-Care Ultrasound Examinations in Consultative Outpatient Internal Medicine Practice.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe overall objective of this study was to examine the differences in ultrasound availability in primary care across Europe.
designCross-sectional study.
settingPrimary care.
participantsPrimary care physicians (PCPs). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES MEASURES: The primary aim was to describe the variation in in-house primary care ultrasonography availability across Europe using descriptive statistics. The secondary aim was to explore associations between in-house ultrasonography availability and the characteristics of PCPs and their clinics using a mixed-effects logistic regression model.
resultsWe collected data from 20 European countries. A total of 2086 PCPs participated, varying from 59 to 446 PCPs per country. The median response rate per country was 24.8%. The median (minimum-maximum) percentage of PCPs across Europe with access to in-house abdominal ultrasonography was 15.3% (0.0%-98.1%) and 12.1% (0.0%-30.8%) had access to in-house pelvic ultrasonography with large variations between countries. We found associations between in-house abdominal ultrasonography availability and larger clinics (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.2 to 4.9) and clinics with medical doctors specialised in areas, which traditionally use ultrasonography (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.1 to 3.8). Corresponding associations were found between in-house pelvic ultrasonography availability and larger clinics (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.3 to 2.7) and clinics with medical doctors specialised in areas, which traditionally use ultrasonography (OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.8 to 5.1). Additionally, we found a negative association between urban clinics and in-house pelvic ultrasound availability (OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 0.9).
conclusionsAcross Europe, there is a large variation in PCPs' access to in-house ultrasonography and organisational aspects of primary care seem to determine this variation. If evidence continues to support ultrasonography as a front-line point-of-care test, implementation strategies for increasing its availability in primary care are needed. Future research should focus on facilitators and barriers that may affect the implementation process.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.