Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35698060›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of emergency medicine2022

Point of care ultrasound as initial diagnostic tool in acute dyspnea patients in the emergency department of a tertiary care center: diagnostic accuracy study.

Himanshi Baid, Nagasubramanyam Vempalli, Subodh Kumar, Poonam Arora, Rohit Walia, Udit Chauhan, Krishna Shukla, Aakash Verma, Hannah Chawang, Disha Agarwal

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of emergency medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05647655 (Value of Transthoracic Ultrasonography), which is not on this map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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.

NCT05647655 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Value of Transthoracic Ultrasonography (TTU) for Etiological Diagnosis of Acute Dyspnea: Cross Sectional Study

TypeobservationalSponsorAssiut UniversityRan2023 to 2024Enrolled143ConditionsDyspneaArmsUltrasonography
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Himanshi BaidDepartment of Emergency Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences Rishikesh, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, 249203, India.
Nagasubramanyam VempalliDepartment of Emergency Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences Rishikesh, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, 249203, India. nagasubramanyam.em@aiimsrishikesh.edu.in.
Subodh KumarDepartment of Pulmonary Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences Gorakhpur, Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh, 273008, India.
Poonam AroraDepartment of Emergency Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences Rishikesh, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, 249203, India.
Rohit WaliaDepartment of Cardiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences Bhatinda, Rishikesh, Punjab, 151001, India.
Udit ChauhanDepartment of Radiodiagnosis, All India Institute of Medical Sciences Rishikesh, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, 249203, India.
Krishna ShuklaDepartment of Emergency Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences Rishikesh, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, 249203, India.
Aakash VermaDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Mahatma Gandhi Medical College & Hospital, Jaipur, Rajasthan, 302022, India.
Hannah ChawangDepartment of Emergency Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences Rishikesh, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, 249203, India.
Disha AgarwalAll India Institute of Medical Sciences Rishikesh, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, 249203, India.
All India Institute of Medical Sciences RishikeshBaba Raghav Das Medical College · INGandhi Medical College & Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDyspnea is one of the common symptoms patients present to the emergency department (ED). The broad spectrum of differentials often requires laboratory and radiological testing in addition to clinical evaluation, causing unnecessary delay. Point of care ultrasound (PoCUS) has shown promising results in accurately diagnosing patients with dyspnea, thus, becoming a popular tool in ED while saving time and maintaining safety standards. Our study aimed to determine the utilization of point of care ultrasound in patients with acute dyspnea as an initial diagnostic tool in our settings. METHODOLOGY: The study was conducted at the emergency department of a tertiary healthcare center in Northern India. Adult patients presenting with acute dyspnea were prospectively enrolled. They were clinically evaluated and necessarily investigated, and a provisional diagnosis was made. Another EP, trained in PoCUS, performed the scan, blinded to the laboratory investigations (not the clinical parameters), and made a PoCUS diagnosis. Our gold standard was the final composite diagnosis made by two Emergency Medicine consultants (who had access to all investigations). Accuracy and concordance of the ultrasound diagnosis to the final composite diagnosis were calculated. The time to formulate a PoCUS diagnosis and final composite diagnosis was compared.

resultsTwo hundred thirty-seven patients were enrolled. The PoCUS and final composite diagnosis showed good concordance (κ = 0.668). PoCUS showed a high sensitivity for acute pulmonary edema, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, pneumonia, pericardial effusion, and low sensitivity for acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS)/acute lung injury (ALI). High overall specificity was seen. A high positive predictive value for all except left ventricular dysfunction, pericardial effusion, non-cardiopulmonary causes of dyspnea, and a low negative predictive value was seen for pneumonia. The median time to make a PoCUS diagnosis was 16 (5-264) min compared to the 170 (8-1346) min taken for the final composite diagnosis. Thus, time was significantly lower for PoCUS diagnosis (p value <0.001).

conclusionBy combining the overall accuracy of PoCUS, the concordance with the final composite diagnosis, and the statistically significant reduction in time taken to formulate the diagnosis, PoCUS shows immense promise as an initial diagnostic tool that may expedite the decision-making in ED for patients' prompt management and disposition with reliable accuracy.

Indexed as

Bedside ultrasoundDiagnostic accuracyDyspneaEmergency departmentPoCUSPoint of care ultrasound

Identifiers

PMID35698060
PMCPMC9190130
OpenAlexW4282579916

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.