Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38638773›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Integrating Pre-test Probability and Point-of-Care Ultrasound (POCUS) in the Emergency Department (ED) Diagnosis of Small Bowel Obstruction (SBO).

Katarzyna Krol, Yi-Ru Chen, Melva O Morales Sierra, Rida Nasir, Naya Mahabir, Lisa Iyeke, Lindsay Jordan, Trupti Shah, Kevin Burke, Matthew Friedman and 4 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Katarzyna KrolEmergency Medicine, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, USA.
Yi-Ru ChenEmergency Medicine, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, USA.
Melva O Morales SierraEmergency Medicine, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, USA.
Rida NasirEmergency Medicine, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, USA.
Naya MahabirEmergency Medicine, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, USA.
Lisa IyekeEmergency Medicine, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, USA.
Lindsay JordanEmergency Medicine, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, USA.
Trupti ShahEmergency Medicine, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, USA.
Kevin BurkeEmergency Medicine, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, USA.
Matthew FriedmanEmergency Medicine, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, USA.
Daniel DexeusEmergency Medicine, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, USA.
Athena MihailosEmergency Medicine, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, USA.
Mark RichmanInternal Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, USA.
Joshua GuttmanEmergency Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, USA.
Northwell Health · USLong Island Jewish Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction A computed tomography (CT) scan and point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) are commonly employed for diagnosing small bowel obstructions (SBOs). Prior studies demonstrated that POCUS has 90-95% sensitivity and specificity compared with CT scanning, which is the gold standard. Unlike other imaging modalities (in which the ordering and performing clinician are not the same), POCUS-performing/interpreting sonologists must recognize the risk of confirmation bias in the POCUS application. Per Bayesian analysis, the likelihood of a diagnosis being true following a diagnostic test is based on the ordering clinician's pre-test probability and the test characteristics (sensitivity and specificity, from which positive and negative likelihood ratios can be calculated). Consequently, establishing pre-test probability is important in informing downstream diagnostic or therapeutic interventions, as pre-test probability influences post-test odds. Little research has been done on the role of POCUS sonologist's pre-test probability and actual POCUS results regarding SBO. This study assessed the role of POCUS, integrating pre-test probability and POCUS results to determine post-test odds. Methods One hundred six patients were recruited on a convenience basis and underwent POCUS and CT between April 2017 and December 2022. All sonographers were credentialed in POCUS. POCUS sonologists' pre-test probabilities and POCUS and CT results were captured, which were compared. Sensitivity, specificity, LR+, and LR- were calculated, and correlations were made between pre-test probability and POCUS and CT results.  Results POCUS exhibited a sensitivity of 92% and specificity of 90%, with a corresponding positive likelihood ratio (LR+) of 9.3 and a negative likelihood ratio (LR-) of 0.09 for diagnosing SBO. Among patients with a high pre-test probability of SBO, a negative ultrasound yielded post-test odds of 0.4%, whereas a positive POCUS yielded post-test odds of 39.6%. Among patients with a low pre-test probability, a negative POCUS resulted in post-test odds of 0%, while a positive POCUS led to post-test odds of 2.1%, yielding a number needed to scan (NNS) of ~50 to identify a patient with an SBO on CT. Conclusion This study confirmed POCUS's sensitivity and specificity of ~90-95% and a corresponding LR+ of 9.2 and LR- of 0.9. Pre-test probability substantially affected post-test odds. Patients with a high pre-test probability and a positive POCUS had post-test odds of 39.6 and should have a confirmatory CT, while those with a negative POCUS have very low post-test odds and very likely will not benefit from CT. Patients with low pre-test probability and a positive POCUS have post-test odds of 2.1%, similar to the Wells Score and HEART score; such patients may not benefit from a CT, though clinicians should use their judgment/discretion. Patients with a low pre-test probability and a negative POCUS have post-test odds of 0% and should not have a CT. Among low pre-test probability patients, the NNS was ~50 to identify patients with an SBO on CT.

Indexed as

edemergency departmentemergency medicinennsnumber needed to scanpocuspoint-of-care ultrasoundsbosmall bowel obstruction

Identifiers

PMID38638773
PMCPMC11026035
OpenAlexW4392902191

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.