ArticleCureus2024
Handheld Ultrasound Bladder Volume Assessment Compared to Standard Technique.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Applying a portable pocket handheld ultrasound scanner to monitor tumor volume in preclinical studies.Medical physics · 2026Article
- Clinical needs assessment for non-invasive intraoperative bladder volume monitoring devices: a cross-sectional study based on the Kano model.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- POC Sensor Systems and Artificial Intelligence-Where We Are Now and Where We Are Going?Biosensors · 2025Review
- Accuracy and Reproducibility of Handheld 3D Ultrasound Versus Conventional 2D Ultrasound for Urinary Bladder Volume Measurement: A Prospective Comparative Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Urinary retention is a common complaint encountered in the emergency department (ED). Current tools for the assessment of urinary retention are either bladder volume estimation with a bladder scanner performed by nursing staff or direct visualization and measurement via bedside ultrasound performed by an emergency physician. Newer handheld ultrasound devices such as the Butterfly iQ have been brought to the market to bring ultrasound more conveniently to the bedside. A recently released handheld auto-calculation tool produces a 3D image of the bladder and instant bladder volume measurement in milliliters. However, there is a paucity of data assessing the validity of the new Butterfly iQ at the bedside. This study sought to compare the diagnostic accuracy and rated user convenience of the nursing bladder scanner, the cart-based ultrasound machine, and the Butterfly iQ auto-bladder volume tool. ED patients were prospectively enrolled and underwent bladder measurements in a randomized, pre-determined order with each modality. Measurements were subsequently compared to the gold standard of catheterization. Cart-based ultrasound had the highest agreement to catheterization when compared to the RN scanner and the Butterfly iQ. However, the Butterfly iQ and RN scanner were both considered more convenient measurement modalities than the cart-based ultrasound. The Butterfly iQ serves as a cost-effective alternative to cart-based ultrasound while providing greater general utility compared to bladder scanners.
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.