ArticleSurgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA2024
Ultrasound identification of hand and wrist anatomical structures by hand surgeons new to ultrasonographic techniques.
Article in Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Radiographic and Ultrasound Imaging Techniques for Assessing the Scapholunate Interval in Healthy Individuals.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Anatomical validation of the sonographic detection of small nervous structures.Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeUltrasound is becoming an essential tool for hand surgeons, but most of them are trained on the job, without any diploma or dedicated training. The aim of this study was to assess the ability of hand surgeons new to ultrasound to identify hand and wrist anatomical structures.
methodsA monocentric study was conducted from January 2022 to April 2022. Ten residents and five attending hand surgeons, ultrasound novices, were involved in this study. The participants underwent two tests, wherein they were required to identify 17 anatomical structures using ultrasound, on the same subject. The second test was similar and carried out 2 to 6 weeks later by all participants. The number of structures successfully identified and if it was the case, the detection time per structure, were recorded. The correlations between participants age, years of surgical experience, surgical background (orthopedic or plastic) and the ability to perform immediately during the first test or to progress between the two tests were also assessed.
resultsThe average number of structures identified during the first test (T1) was 14.1+/-2.1 (82.9%), versus 16.2+/-0.8 (95.3%) structures during the second test (T2) (p = 0.001). The mean detection time per structure was 53.4 +/- 18.9 s during T1 versus 27.7 +/- 7.2 s during T2 (p < 0.0001). A moderate negative correlation between the progression in the number of anatomical structures identified between the two tests and the years of surgical experience (ρ=-0.56; p = 0.029) was found. The other parameters were neither correlated with the ability to perform at the first test nor with the progression between the two tests.
conclusionHand surgeons new to ultrasound are most of the time able to identify hand and wrist anatomical structures. Comparison of their first and second tests showed significant potential for improvement in anatomical structure identification and detection time of those, especially in surgeons with limited surgical experience.
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.