ArticleInternal and emergency medicine2025
A quantitative needs assessment for a tele-ultrasound consult program in a tertiary care Emergency Department.
Article in Internal and emergency medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has been shown to be beneficial in facilitating patient care, but its adoption is variable among emergency medicine (EM) clinicians. We identified the patterns of POCUS use and gaps in POCUS integration in a tertiary care emergency department (ED). These data provide a user-centered platform for subsequent development of a tele-ultrasound (tele-US) consultation program. We developed a 25-item needs assessment survey and used a 5-point Likert scale to assess current patterns of POCUS use and potential needs for POCUS among EM clinicians. Data were analyzed descriptively, and a chi-square analysis was used to assess for differences in POCUS use and comfort levels among clinicians. Overall, 48% (91/190) of eligible providers responded to the survey. Clinician responders included 38% (35/91) attendings (including fellows), 29% (26/91) residents, and 33% (30/91) advance practice providers (APPs). In assessing needs, 70% (58/83) of clinicians noted they would use POCUS more if they had more training. 76% (63/83) of clinicians felt comfortable with image acquisition and 68% (56/83) with image interpretation. APPs were less comfortable with POCUS image interpretation and clinical integration of POCUS findings compared to residents (χ
Indexed as
Identifiers
39499427What 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.