Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38363766›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS): Assessing patient satisfaction and socioemotional benefits in the hospital setting.

Evan A Balmuth, Danny Luan, Deanna Jannat-Khah, Arthur Evans, Tanping Wong, David A Scales

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
17.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The merit of rural point-of-care ultrasound: Carotid pseudoaneurysm case report.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. POCUS: Is It Time? … And Is There Time?Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM
    Article
  15. An Academic Family Physician's Point-of-Care Ultrasound (POCUS) Experience.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM
    Article
  16. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Evan A BalmuthDepartment of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9762-0905
Danny LuanDepartment of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, United States of America.
Deanna Jannat-KhahDepartment of Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, United States of America.
Arthur EvansDepartment of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, United States of America.
Tanping WongDepartment of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, United States of America.
David A ScalesDepartment of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-5727-7148
NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital · USHospital for Special Surgery · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is an imaging modality used to make expedient patient care decisions at bedside. Though its diagnostic utility has been extensively described, POCUS is not yet considered standard of care in inpatient settings. Data from emergency department settings suggest that POCUS may yield socioemotional benefits beyond its diagnostic utility; furthermore, elements of the POCUS experience are known to promote placebo effects. These elements likely contribute to a placebo-like "POCUS positive care effect" (PPCE) with socioemotional benefits for receptive patients. Our objective is to provide the first characterization of the PPCE and its facilitating factors in an inpatient setting. In this novel mixed-methods study, we recruited 30 adult patients admitted to internal medicine floors in an urban academic medical center, recorded observations during their routine POCUS encounters, and administered post-encounter surveys. We conducted complementary quantitative and qualitative analyses to define and assess the magnitude of the PPCE. We also aimed to identify factors associated with and facilitating receptiveness to the PPCE. The results indicated that POCUS improves patients' satisfaction with their hospital providers and care overall, as well as perceived care efficiency. Mutual engagement, strong therapeutic alliances, and interpreting POCUS images to provide reassurance are most closely associated with this PPCE. Patients who have lower anxiety levels, less severe illness, and received efficient care delivery during their hospitalizations are most receptive to the PPCE. We conclude that diagnostic POCUS has the potential to exert a positive care effect for hospitalized patients. This PPCE is associated with modifiable factors at the patient, provider, and environment levels. Together, our findings lay the groundwork for an optimized "therapeutic POCUS" that yields maximal socioemotional benefits for receptive patients.

Indexed as

Patient SatisfactionPoint-of-Care SystemsAdultEmergency Service, HospitalHospitalsHumansInpatientsPoint-of-Care TestingUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID38363766
PMCPMC10871481
OpenAlexW4391878342

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.