ArticleCureus2025
Performance of High-Quality Point-of-Care Ultrasound by Advanced Practice Providers in an Academic Emergency Department.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Innovation in nursing education: point-of-care ultrasound for obtaining difficult venous access.Revista brasileira de enfermagem · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is a valuable tool in emergency medicine, enhancing diagnostic accuracy and guiding patient care. While emergency physicians have long utilized POCUS, advanced practice providers (APPs), including physician assistants and nurse practitioners, were only formally supported by the American College of Emergency Physicians in 2019. This study evaluates the impact of an educational intervention on APPs' ability to perform high-quality, billable POCUS in a high-volume academic emergency department (ED) (75,000 visits/year). Materials and methods This study included three components: (1) a one-hour didactic session followed by hands-on training and direct clinical observation in soft tissue (ST) and fetal heart tone (FHT) POCUS, (2) a quality assurance review of scans performed by APPs, and (3) a voluntary survey assessing APP's perceptions of POCUS use. Data were collected between 2015 and 2018. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the survey data. Survey responses were reported as frequencies. Descriptive statistics, including percentages, means for interval scales, and medians for ordinal scales, were generated using SPSS Statistics version 26.0 (IBM Corp. Released 2019. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 26.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp). Results Fourteen APPs performed 471 POCUS exams, with 87% (N=412) initially meeting criteria for billing. The remaining 13% (N=59) scans required additional steps, either completion of electronic health record documentation in 87% (N=51) or an attending physician signature in 13% (N=8), before they were considered billable. Following standard departmental procedures for addressing charting deficiencies, all required documentation and signatures were completed, making 100% of scans ultimately billable, with no rejections due to image quality. Survey respondents (N=6) reported increased confidence and changes in clinical management due to POCUS. The primary barrier to POCUS use was limited training in additional applications. APPs used POCUS more frequently for ST evaluations than for FHT assessments, with self-reported confidence scores of 7.8 and 4.4 out of 10, respectively. Conclusion This study demonstrates that APPs can perform high-quality, billable POCUS in the ED following structured training and quality review feedback.
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.