ReviewThe ultrasound journal2022
The impact of lung ultrasound on clinical-decision making across departments: a systematic review.
Review in The ultrasound journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lung Ultrasound Offers Fast and Reliable Exclusion of Heart Failure in the Emergency Department: A Prospective Diagnostic Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Chest ultrasound vs. Radiograph for pneumothorax diagnosis performed by emergency healthcare workers in the emergency department: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The ultrasound journal · 2025Review
- Lung ultrasound score as a tool to assess pulmonary ventilation and disease severity in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Impact of ultrasound settings on lung vertical artefacts: an observational study in mechanically ventilated patients.ERJ open research · 2025Article
- Ten Questions on Using Lung Ultrasonography to Diagnose and Manage Pneumonia in the Hospital-at-Home Model: Part I-Techniques and Patterns.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Nuts and bolts of lung ultrasound: utility, scanning techniques, protocols, and findings in common pathologies.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Review
- Article
- Effects of nurse delivered thoracic ultrasound on management of adult intensive care unit patients: A prospective observational study.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2023Article
- Lung Ultrasound in Critical Care and Emergency Medicine: Clinical Review.Advances in respiratory medicine · 2023Review
- B-mode ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound for evaluation of pneumonia: A pictorial essay.Australasian journal of ultrasound in medicine · 2023Review
- Article
- A proposed framework for point of care lung ultrasound by respiratory physiotherapists: scope of practice, education and governance.The ultrasound journal · 2022Review
- Routine Application of Lung Ultrasonography in Respiratory Care: Knowledge, Perceptions, and Barriers to Instigate.Advances in medical education and practice · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLung ultrasound has established itself as an accurate diagnostic tool in different clinical settings. However, its effects on clinical-decision making are insufficiently described. This systematic review aims to investigate the impact of lung ultrasound, exclusively or as part of an integrated thoracic ultrasound examination, on clinical-decision making in different departments, especially the emergency department (ED), intensive care unit (ICU), and general ward (GW).
methodsThis systematic review was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42021242977). PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched for original studies reporting changes in clinical-decision making (e.g. diagnosis, management, or therapy) after using lung ultrasound. Inclusion criteria were a recorded change of management (in percentage of cases) and with a clinical presentation to the ED, ICU, or GW. Studies were excluded if examinations were beyond the scope of thoracic ultrasound or to guide procedures. Mean changes with range (%) in clinical-decision making were reported. Methodological data on lung ultrasound were also collected. Study quality was scored using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.
resultsA total of 13 studies were included: five studies on the ED (546 patients), five studies on the ICU (504 patients), two studies on the GW (1150 patients), and one study across all three wards (41 patients). Lung ultrasound changed the diagnosis in mean 33% (15-44%) and 44% (34-58%) of patients in the ED and ICU, respectively. Lung ultrasound changed the management in mean 48% (20-80%), 42% (30-68%) and 48% (48-48%) of patients in the ED, in the ICU and in the GW, respectively. Changes in management were non-invasive in 92% and 51% of patients in the ED and ICU, respectively. Lung ultrasound methodology was heterogeneous across studies. Risk of bias was moderate to high in all studies.
conclusionsLung ultrasound, exclusively or as a part of thoracic ultrasound, has substantial impact on clinical-decision making by changing diagnosis and management in the EDs, ICUs, and GWs. The current evidence level and methodological heterogeneity underline the necessity for well-designed trials and standardization of methodology.
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.