Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37684568›Full record

ArticleBMC primary care2023

Rural family physician use of point-of-care ultrasonography: experiences of primary care providers in British Columbia, Canada.

Jude Kornelsen, Hilary Ho, Virginia Robinson, Oron Frenkel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC primary care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. A Retrospective Analysis of Soft Tissue Point-of-Care Ultrasound (POCUS) in Primary Care.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. The merit of rural point-of-care ultrasound: Carotid pseudoaneurysm case report.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2025
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Use of point-of-care ultrasound in rural British Columbia: Scale, training, and barriers.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2024
    Article
  18. 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

4 authors.

Jude KornelsenCentre for Rural Health Research, Department of Family Practice, University of British Columbia, 3rd Floor David Strangway Building, 5950 University Boulevard, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada. jude.kornelsen@familymed.ubc.ca.
Hilary HoCentre for Rural Health Research, Department of Family Practice, University of British Columbia, 3rd Floor David Strangway Building, 5950 University Boulevard, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada.
Virginia RobinsonRural Coordination Centre of British Columbia, 1665 West Broadway, Vancouver, BC, V6J 1X1, Canada.
Oron FrenkelProvidence Health Care, St. Paul's Hospital, 1081 Burrard St, Vancouver, BC, V6Z 1Y6, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn British Columbia (BC), rural and remote areas lack proximal access to radiographic services. Poor access to radiographic services in rural settings presents a challenge to timely diagnosis and screening across many disease states and healthy pregnancies. As a solution to the lack of access to radiographic services in rural settings, the Rural Coordination Centre of BC (RCCbc) supported rural Family Physicians (FPs) wishing to use PoCUS through the Intelligent Network for PoCUS (IN PoCUS) program. This study evaluates FPs' experience and use of PoCUS in their clinical practice.

methodsThis qualitative study conducted in-depth virtual interviews with 21 FPs across rural BC. The interview asked participants' motivation to participate in the RCCbc program, the type of training they received, their current use of PoCUS, their experience with the technology, and their experience interacting with specialists in regional centres. Thematic analysis of findings was undertaken.

resultsThis study used Rogers' framework on the five elements of diffusion of innovation to understand the factors that impede and enable the adoption of PoCUS in rural practice. Rural FPs in this study differentiated PoCUS from formal imaging done by specialists. The adoption of PoCUS was viewed as an extension of physical exams and was compatible with their values of providing generalist care. This study found that the use of PoCUS provided additional information that led to better clinical decision-making for triage and allowed FPs to determine the urgency for patient referral and transport to tertiary hospitals. FPs also reported an increase in job satisfaction with PoCUS use. Some barriers to using PoCUS included the time needed to be acquainted with the technology and learning how to integrate it into their clinical flow in a seamless manner.

conclusionThis study has demonstrated the importance of PoCUS in improving patient care and facilitating timely diagnosis and treatment. As the use of PoCUS among FPs is relatively new in Canada, larger infrastructure support such as improving billing structures, long-term subsidies, educational opportunities, and a quality improvement framework is needed to support the use of PoCUS among rural FPs.

Indexed as

Physicians, FamilyPoint-of-Care SystemsBritish ColumbiaFemaleHumansPregnancyPrimary Health CareUltrasonographyPoint-of-Care UltrasoundRural HealthRural MedicineTelemedicineVirtual Medicine

Identifiers

PMID37684568
PMCPMC10486031

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.