ArticleThe ultrasound journal2019
The use of an external ultrasound fixator (Probefix) on intensive care patients: a feasibility study.
Article in The ultrasound journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical value of CVP+VIVC in predicting fluid resuscitation in patients with septic shock.African health sciences · 2023Observational
- Artificial intelligence (AI) versus expert: A comparison of left ventricular outflow tract velocity time integral (LVOT-VTI) assessment between ICU doctors and an AI tool.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2022Article
- Continuous hands-free monitoring of echocardiographic exercise test using probe fixation device.Cardiology journal · 2022Article
- A demonstration of high field-of-view stability in hands-free echocardiography.Cardiovascular ultrasound · 2020Article
- Rationale for using the velocity-time integral and the minute distance for assessing the stroke volume and cardiac output in point-of-care settings.The ultrasound journal · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn critical care medicine, the use of transthoracic echo (TTE) is expanding. TTE can be used to measure dynamic parameters such as cardiac output (CO). An important asset of TTE is that it is a non-invasive technique. The Probefix is an external ultrasound holder strapped to the patient which makes it possible to measure CO using TTE in a fixed position possibly making the CO measurements more accurate compared to separate TTE CO measurements. The feasibility of the use of the Probefix to measure CO before and after a passive leg raising test (PLR) was studied. Intensive care patients were included after detection of hypovolemia using Flotrac. Endpoints were the possibility to use Probefix. Also CO measurements with and without the use of Probefix, before and after a PLR were compared to the CO measurements using Flotrac. Side effects in terms of skin alterations after the use of Probefix and patient's comments on (dis)comfort were evaluated.
resultsTen patients were included; in eight patients, sufficient recordings with the use of Probefix could be obtained. Using Bland-Altman plots, no difference was found in accuracy of measurements of CO with or without the use of Probefix before and after a PLR compared to Flotrac generated CO. There were only mild and temporary skin effects of the use of Probefix.
conclusionsIn this small feasibility study, the Probefix could be used in eight out of ten intensive care patients. The use of Probefix did not result in more or less accurate CO measurements compared to manually recorded TTE CO measurements. We suggest that larger studies on the use of Probefix in intensive care patients are needed.
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.