Observational studyBMJ open2020
Use and impact of point-of-care ultrasonography in general practice: a prospective observational study.
Observational study in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 49 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
How Point-of-Care Ultrasound Affects the Diagnostic Process in General Practice. A Prospective Follow-up Study.
Point-of-care Ultrasonography in Norwegian General Practice and Self-perceived Use in Diagnostics - a Prospective Observational Study
How Point-of-care Ultrasound Affects the Diagnostic and Therapeutic Process in General Practice. A Prospective Follow-up Study in France
Who cites it
49 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 74 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sample Size of Trials Investigating the Impact of Point-of-Care Ultrasound-Guided Strategies on Patient Outcomes: A Systematic Review.Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluation of Dutch General Practitioners ultrasound referrals and opportunities for point-of-care ultrasound: A retrospective analysis.The European journal of general practice · 2026Article
- Point-of-care ultrasound in German general practice: a qualitative study of opportunities and barriers.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Point-of-care ultrasound in primary care - EFSUMB core curriculum and training recommendations - a position paper.Ultraschall in der Medizin (Stuttgart, Germany : 1980) · 2026Article
- Liver Point-of-Care Ultrasound (POCUS): Roadmap for training, credentialing, and implementation.Hepatology communications · 2026Review
- Effects of point-of-care ultrasonography on clinical decisions for suspected hypervolemia: a cross-sectional study of two independent samples.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2026Article
- Point-of-care ultrasound in primary care: time for a standardized Italian curriculum?Journal of ultrasound · 2026Article
- Survey of the use of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) among veterinarians in Quebec, France, and Belgium.The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2026Article
- Use of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in French urgent primary care: a national survey of general practitioners in the SOS Médecins network.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Evaluating the Point-of-Care Ultrasound Curriculum in a Family Medicine Residency: Challenges and Successes From a 10-Year Experience.Family medicine · 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
- Approach of family physicians to the use of ultrasonography in Türki̇ye.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- The effect of AI-assisted bedside echocardiography on inpatient care: a prospective trial.European heart journal. Digital health · 2026Article
- Point-of-care ultrasonography in Turkish primary care: a qualitative exploration of practice and experience.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Lung POCUS in a Pulmonary Outpatient Clinic: Balancing Utility and Feasibility.POCUS journal · 2025Article
- Does point-of-care ultrasound examination by the general practitioner lead to inappropriate care? A follow-up study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2025Observational
- Estimation of toe brachial index based on forefoot Doppler waveforms.European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice · 2025Article
- General practitioners' scanning competence following tailored ultrasound training: a hybrid effectiveness-implementation study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Overcoming barriers in the use of artificial intelligence in point of care ultrasound.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
- Accuracy of point-of-care ultrasound examination of the lung in primary care performed by general practitioners: a cross-sectional study.BMC primary care · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo describe how general practitioners (GPs) use point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS) and how it influences the diagnostic process and treatment of patients.
designProspective observational study using an online questionnaire before and after POCUS.
settingOffice-based general practice.
participantsTwenty GPs consecutively recruited all patients examined with POCUS in 1 month. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: We estimated the use of POCUS through the indication for use, the frequency of use, the time consumption, the extent of modification of the examination and the findings.The influence on the diagnostic process was estimated through change in the tentative diagnoses, change in confidence, the ability to produce ultrasound images and the relationship between confidence and organs scanned or tentative diagnoses.The influence of POCUS on patient treatment was estimated through change in plan for the patient, change in patient's treatment and the relationship between such changes and certain findings.
resultsThe GPs included 574 patients in the study. POCUS was used in patient consultations with a median frequency of 8.6% (IQR: 4.9-12.6). Many different organs were scanned covering more than 100 different tentative diagnoses. The median time taken to perform POCUS was 5 min (IQR: 3-8). Across applications and GPs, POCUS entailed a change in diagnoses in 49.4% of patients; increased confidence in a diagnosis in 89.2% of patients; a change in the management plan for 50.9% of patients including an absolute reduction in intended referrals to secondary care from 49.2% to 25.6%; and a change in treatment for 26.5% of patients.
conclusionsThe clinical utilisation of POCUS was highly variable among the GPs included in this study in terms of the indication for performing POCUS, examined scanning modalities and frequency of use. Overall, using POCUS altered the GPs' diagnostic process and clinical decision-making in nearly three out of four consultations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03375333.
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.