ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Prospective Comparison of Handheld Ultrasound Devices from Different Manufacturers with Respect to B-Scan Quality and Clinical Significance for Various Abdominal Sonography Questions.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic Review of Commercially Available Clinical CMUT-Based Systems for Use in Medical Ultrasound Imaging: Products, Applications, and Performance.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Pooled it
- Phantom-based training of ultrasound-guided breast biopsy in medical education: a randomized controlled trial comparing handheld and high-end ultrasound.BMC medical education · 2025Trial
- Handheld Ultrasound: Technical Review and International Expert Consensus Recommendations.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Feasibility of point-of-care ultrasound during the emergency department triage: a prospective cohort study.The ultrasound journal · 2025Article
- Performance and development trends of ultrasound diagnostic systems in military settings: a review.The ultrasound journal · 2025Review
- Usefulness of handheld ultrasound devices in the assessment of abdominal pathology and comparison with high-end ultrasound devices.The ultrasound journal · 2025Article
- Comparison of Six Handheld Ultrasound Devices by Pediatric Point of Care Ultrasound (POCUS) Experts.POCUS journal · 2025Article
- Prospective Comparison of Nine Different Handheld Ultrasound (HHUS) Devices by Ultrasound Experts with Regard to B-Scan Quality, Device Handling and Software in Abdominal Sonography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Effectiveness of an ultrasound basic cancer training program through on-site training and virtual case discussions in rural Tanzania: a proof-of-concept study.Ecancermedicalscience · 2024Article
- Insights Into Modern Undergraduate Ultrasound Education: Prospective Comparison of Digital and Analog Teaching Resources in a Flipped Classroom Concept - The DIvAN Study.Ultrasound international open · 2024Article
- Inter-System Variability of Eight Different Handheld Ultrasound (HHUS) Devices-A Prospective Comparison of B-Scan Quality and Clinical Significance in Intensive Care.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHandheld ultrasound (HHUS) devices have chiefly been deployed in emergency medicine, where they are considered a valid tool. The data situation is less clear in the case of internal questions in abdominal sonography. In our study, we investigate whether HHUS devices from different manufacturers differ in their B-scan quality, and whether any differences are relevant for the significance of an internal ultrasound examination.
methodThe study incorporated eight HHUS devices from different manufacturers. Ultrasound videos of seven defined sonographic questions were recorded with all of the devices. The analogue recording of the same findings with a conventional high-end ultrasound (HEUS) device served as an evaluation criterion. Then, the corresponding findings were played side by side and evaluated by fourteen ultrasound experts using a point scale (5 points = very good; 1 point = insufficient).
resultsThe HHUS devices achieved relatively good results in terms of both the B-scan quality assessment and the ability to answer the clinical question, regardless of the manufacturer. One of the tested HHUS devices even achieved a significantly (
conclusionIn various clinical abdominal sonography questions, HHUS systems can reliably reproduce findings, and are-while bearing their limitations in mind-an acceptable alternative to conventional HEUS systems. Irrespective of this, the present study demonstrated relevant differences in the B-scan quality of HHUS devices from different manufacturers.
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.