Trial reportScandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine2024
Impact of emergency physician performed ultrasound in the evaluation of adult patients with acute abdominal pain: a prospective randomized bicentric trial.
Trial report in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04912206 (Impact of Emergency Physician-Performed Ultrasound for the Evaluation of Patients With Acute Abdominal Pain, Prospective Randomized Dual Centre Study), which is not on this 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.
Impact of Emergency Physician-Performed Ultrasound for the Evaluation of Patients With Acute Abdominal Pain, Prospective Randomized Dual Centre Study
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- PoCUS-first versus CT-only for non-traumatic abdominal pain: a propensity score-weighted cohort study on ED resource utilization.Internal and emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Imaging of the Equine Abdomen Using Point of Care Ultrasound (POCUS)-A Resource for the Equine Practitioner.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Review
- Article
- Evaluating the Diagnostic Accuracy of Point-of-Care Ultrasound in Acute Abdominal Pain in the Emergency Setting.Cureus · 2025Article
- Point-of-Care Ultrasound Within One Hour Associated with ED Flow and Resource Use in Non-Traumatic Abdominal Pain: A Retrospective Observational Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Enhancing pediatric abdominal pain diagnosis: the role of ultrasound layered scanning technique.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- The Impact of Point-of-Care Ultrasound on the Diagnosis and Management of Small Bowel Obstruction in the Emergency Department: A Retrospective Observational Single-Center Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAbdominal pain is common in patients visiting the emergency department (ED). The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic contribution of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in patients presenting to the ED with acute abdominal pain.
methodsWe designed an interventional randomized, controlled, open label, parallel-group, trial in two French EDs. We included adult patients presenting to the ED with acute abdominal pain. Exclusion criteria were a documented end-of-life, an immediate need of life-support therapy and pregnant or breast-feeding women. Patients were randomized in the experimental group (i.e., workup including POCUS) or control group (usual care). The primary objective of the study was to assess the added value of POCUS on diagnostic pathway in the ED, according to the diagnostic established a posteriori by an adjudication committee. The primary endpoint was the proportion of exact preliminary diagnosis between the 2 groups. The preliminary diagnosis made after clinical examination and biological results with POCUS (intervention arm) or without POCUS (usual care) was considered exact if it was similar to the adjudication committee diagnosis.
resultsBetween June 2021 11th and June 2022 23th, 256 patients were randomized, but five were not included in the primary analysis, leaving 125 patients in the POCUS group and 126 patients in the usual care group (130 women and 121 men, median [Q1-Q3] age: 42 [30;57]). There was no difference for exact diagnosis between the two groups (POCUS 70/125, 56% versus control 78/126 (62%), RD 1.23 [95% CI 0.74-2.04]). There was no difference in the accuracy for the diagnosis of non-specific abdominal pain nor number of biological or radiological exams. Diagnostic delays and length of stay in the ED were also similar.
conclusionsIn this trial, systematic POCUS did not improve the rate of diagnostic accuracy in unselected patients presenting to the ED with acute abdominal pain. However, as it was a safe procedure, further research should focus on patients with suspected etiologies where POCUS is particularly useful.
trial registrationThis trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov on 2022/07/20 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04912206?id=NCT04912206&rank=1 ) (NCT04912206).
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.