ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020
Environmental and Patient Impact of Applying a Point-of-Care Ultrasound Model in Primary Care: Rural vs. Urban Centres.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Point of care ultrasonography as the new "Laennec Sthetoscope".World journal of nephrology · 2024Article
- Impact of point-of-care ultrasound use on patient referral decisions in rural Kenya: a mixed methods study.BMC health services research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Motor vehicles are a major contributor to air pollution, and the exposure to this human-caused air pollution can lead to harmful health effects. This study evaluates the impact of the provision of point-of-care ultrasounds (POCUS) by primary care (PC) to avoid the patient's need to travel to a specialized service. The study estimates the costs and air pollution avoided during 2019. The results confirm that performing this ultrasound at the point of care reduces the emission of 61.4 gr of carbon monoxide, 14.8 gr of nitric oxide and 2.7 gr of sulfur dioxide on each trip. During the study, an average of 17.8 km, 21.4 min per trip and almost 2000 L of fuel consumed in a year were avoided. Performing POCUS from PC reduces fuel consumption and the emission of air pollutants and also saves time and money. Furthermore, only 0.3% of the scans had to be repeated by radiologists. However, more studies with more participants need to be done to calculate the exact impact that these pollution reductions will have on human health.
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.