ArticleAEM education and training2023
Minutes matter: Time it takes to perform point-of-care ultrasound.
Article in AEM education and training, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Abdominal screening with ultrasound in children with suspected acute appendicitis.European radiology · 2026Article
- Point-of-Care Ultrasound After Non-fatal Drowning in Rural Western Nepal: A Case Report.Clinical practice and cases in emergency medicine · 2026Article
- The Value of Point-of-care Ocular Ultrasound in Physician-in-triage Model: A Case Series.Clinical practice and cases in emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Determination of the Optimal Landmark for Tube Thoracostomy in Trauma Patients: A Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Guided Lung Ultrasound by Nonexperts.JAMA cardiology · 2025Article
- Is it worth trying? A cross-sectional study on the implementation of point-of-care ultrasound in Hungarian primary care.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Minutes matter: Time it takes to perform point-of-care ultrasound.AEM education and training · 2023Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: While point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) is a safe, versatile tool that can improve patient care, the perceived time investment needed to incorporate PoCUS into clinical care is cited as a barrier to performance. We sought to determine the time it takes to perform a PoCUS examination and whether this time was influenced by training level and prior ultrasound experience. Methods: This was a retrospective study looking at time stamps of all emergency medicine (EM) provider-performed PoCUS examinations during clinical shifts from August 10, 2019, to June 7, 2022, at a suburban academic emergency department that is the site for a 3-year EM residency. Our workflow is order-based; when PoCUS is ordered, that patient's information populates the ultrasound machine worklist. Selecting the patient's name from the worklist generates a time-stamped patient information page (PIP). We defined the PIP time stamp as the start of the PoCUS examination. The duration of one PoCUS examination was defined as the time of the last image acquired minus the time of the PIP. General estimating equations were used to estimate differences between training level and between prior scan status using an exchangeable correlation and Tukey adjusted pairwise comparisons. A two-tailed chi-square analysis was used for comparing accuracy according to training level. Results: Of 4187 PoCUS examinations abstracted, 2144 met study criteria. The median (IQR) time spent per examination was 6.0 (3-9) min. First-year residents took the longest to perform PoCUS among all providers ( Conclusions: Overall median time to perform PoCUS was 6.0 min. EM residents became more efficient in performing PoCUS as they advanced from first- to third-year, without compromising accuracy.
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.