ArticleThe American journal of emergency medicine2022
ED point-of-care ultrasonography is associated with earlier drainage of pericardial effusion: A retrospective cohort study.
Article in The American journal of emergency medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pre-hospital and emergency department point-of-care ultrasound in cardiovascular emergencies: a scoping review.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2026Review
- Can FoCUS Speed Up the Management of Acute Coronary Syndrome in the Emergency Department?Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Patient Sociodemographic Factors Are Associated with Receiving Point-of-care Ultrasound in the Emergency Department.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Heart in Focus: Advancing Pericardial Effusion Diagnosis With Point-of-Care Ultrasound.Cureus · 2024Review
- Review
- The Performance Characteristics of Handheld, Non-Piezoelectric Point-of-Care Ultrasound (POCUS) in the Emergency Department.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Point-of-Care Ultrasound for the Diagnosis of Frequent Cardiovascular Diseases: A Review.Cureus · 2023Review
- Pediatric Residents' Perceptions of a Point-of-Care Ultrasound Collaboration With Emergency Medicine.Cureus · 2023Article
- Point-of-Care Tests' Role in Time Metrics of Urgent Interventions in Emergency Department; a Systematic Review of Literature.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2022Review
- Unlocking the Mystery: Resident-Led POCUS Intervention in Community Hospital Revealing Pericardial Tamponade in a Complex Case.Journal of investigative medicine high impact case reportsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo determine the association between emergency department point-of-care cardiac ultrasonography (POCUS) utilization and time to pericardial effusion drainage during an 8-year period when the emergency ultrasound program was established at our institution.
methodsWe performed a single-center retrospective cohort study in patients undergoing pericardiocentesis or other procedure for evacuation of pericardial effusion. Data was collected using both direct queries to the electronic health record database and two-examiner chart review. The primary outcome was time to intervention for pericardial effusion drainage. Multivariable Cox regression, with and without inverse probability weighting for likelihood to receive POCUS, was used to determine the association between POCUS and time to intervention. Secondary outcomes included 28-day mortality.
results257 patient encounters were included with 137 receiving POCUS and 120 who did not. The proportion of patients receiving POCUS increased from 18.5% to 69.5% during the early to late periods of the study. POCUS was associated with an earlier median time to intervention of 21.6 h (95% CI 17.2, 24.2) compared to 34.6 h (27.0, 50.5) in the No POCUS group. After adjustment for patient demographics, anticoagulation, time of presentation and hemodynamic instability, POCUS was associated with earlier intervention (HR 2.08 [95% CI 1.56, 2.77]). POCUS use was not associated with a difference in 28-day mortality, which was evaluated as a secondary outcome. However, diagnosis of pericardial effusion by the ED physician using any means (POCUS or other imaging) was associated with decreased 28-day mortality (9.7% vs. 26.0%, -16.3% for POCUS [95% CI -29.1, -3.5]).
conclusionPOCUS was associated with an earlier time to intervention for pericardial effusions after adjustment for multiple confounding factors. Failure to diagnose pericardial effusion in the ED using any diagnostic testing including POCUS, was associated with increased 28-day mortality.
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.