ArticleBMC health services research2025
Impact of worklist selection on point-of-care ultrasound workflow - a quality improvement project.
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. 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.
- An Accountable Encounter-Based Imaging Workflow for Point-of-Care Ultrasound: Integrating Image Availability, Clinician Attribution, and Documentation Accountability.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Improving point-of-care ultrasound documentation among emergency medicine residents: a mixed-method implementation research study.BMJ open quality · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResearch demonstrates that Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) improves clinical outcomes for patients. Improving clinician satisfaction with POCUS should promote utilization into everyday practice, leading to improved clinical outcomes. Despite this benefit, there are still barriers to use including POCUS workflow. This project was undertaken to improve the functionality of the existing POCUS workflow and move toward an "encounter-based" system by automating worklist generation. It aimed to streamline the POCUS workflow, primarily determine if there was improved clinician satisfaction with the new workflow, and secondarily determine the change in revenue generation from decreased errors in data entry.
methodsA new workflow was created which automatically populated every registered Emergency Department (ED) patient into the worklist upon patient registration. Clinician feedback on their use of the new workflow was sought via survey after implementation. The number of medical record number (MRN) entry errors prior to and following implementation was manually reviewed and calculated.
resultsThere was a strong preference for the new workflow, with 36 of 38 (94.7%) clinicians finding it to be more convenient and 37 of 38 (97.4%) finding it to be preferable to use compared to the old workflow. Implementation also resulted in a 36% reduction in database studies containing an MRN data entry error.
conclusionsAn "encounter-based" workflow is strongly preferred over manual data entry for POCUS workflow among clinicians. Additionally, there was no cost to the intervention and the total data entry errors were significantly reduced, allowing for improved quality review and increased revenue.
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.