Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34148178›Full record

ArticleInternal and emergency medicine2022

Confidence and use of physical examination and point-of-care ultrasonography for detection of abdominal or pleural free fluid. A cross-sectional survey.

Antonio Leidi, Antoine Saudan, Guillaume Soret, Frédéric Rouyer, Christophe Marti, Jérôme Stirnemann, Jean-Luc Reny, Olivier Grosgurin

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Internal and emergency medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Antonio Leidi *General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3934-0104
Antoine Saudan *Faculty of Medicine, Geneva University, Geneva, Switzerland.
Guillaume SoretGeneral Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Frédéric RouyerEmergency Medicine, Department of Acute Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Christophe MartiGeneral Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Jérôme StirnemannGeneral Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Jean-Luc RenyGeneral Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7528-7363
Olivier GrosgurinGeneral Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland. Olivier.Grosgurin@hcuge.ch.
University Hospital of Geneva · CHUniversity of Geneva · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Physical examination (PE) has always been a corner stone of medical practice. The recent advances in imaging and fading of doctors' ability in performing it, however, raised doubts on PE usefulness. Point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS) is gaining ground in medicine with the detection of free fluids being one of its main applications. To estimate physicians' confidence and use of PE and POCUS for the detection of abdominal or pleural free fluid, we conducted a cross-sectional survey. In all, 246 internal and emergency medicine physicians answered to the survey (197 in-hospital physicians and 49 general practitioners; response rate 28.5%). Almost all declared to perform PE in case of suspected ascites or pleural effusion (88% and 90%, respectively). The highest rates of confidence were observed in conventional PE signs (91% for diminished breath sounds, 80% for dullness to thorax percussion, and 66% for abdominal flank dullness). For the remaining signs, rates of confidence were less than 53%. Physicians with > 15 years of experience and POCUS-naïve doctors reported higher confidence in PE. Most of emergency and almost half of internal medicine physicians (78% and 44%, respectively) attended a structured POCUS course. POCUS use was higher among trained physicians for both ascites (84% vs 50%, p < 0.001) and pleural effusion (80% vs 34%, p < 0.001). Similarly, higher POCUS use was observed in younger physicians. In conclusion, PE is frequently performed and rates of confidence are low for most PE signs, especially among young doctors and POCUS users. This detailed inventory suggests an ongoing shift towards POCUS integration in clinical practice.

Indexed as

Pleural EffusionPoint-of-Care SystemsAscitesCross-Sectional StudiesEmergency Service, HospitalHumansPhysical ExaminationUltrasonographyAscitesFree fluidPhysical examinationPleural effusionPOCUSUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID34148178
PMCPMC8214715
OpenAlexW3173831859

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.