ArticlePOCUS journal2025
Performance of the Cardiovascular Point of Care Ultrasound (POCUS) Exam by Internal Medicine Residents.
Article in POCUS journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Few studies have examined internal medicine residents' performance using cardiovascular point of care ultrasound (POCUS). Methods: From 2019 to 2022, first-year residents from two academic medical centers in Baltimore participated in the Assessment of Examination and Communication Skills (APECS). Interns examined a single patient with aortic insufficiency and were assessed on physical exam and POCUS technique, identifying physical exam and POCUS findings, generating a differential diagnosis, clinical judgment, and maintaining patient welfare. Spearman's correlation test was used to describe associations between clinical domains. Preceptor comments were examined to identify common errors in physical exam and POCUS exam technique and in identifying correct findings. Results: Fifty-three first-year residents (interns) performed a cardiovascular POCUS exam. Of these, 44 (83%) scored either "unsatisfactory" or "borderline" on their POCUS technique with a mean score of 29.5 (out of 100). Seventeen (32%) interns were able to correctly obtain a parasternal-long axis (PLAX) view with only 26 (52%) attempting an apical four-chamber (AP4) or subcostal (SUBC) view. Of the 11 participants who correctly obtained both PLAX and parasternal-short views (PSAX), 10 were able to properly identify a normal ejection fraction and the absence of a pericardial effusion. POCUS technique was statistically significantly associated with physical exam technique, identifying the correct POCUS findings, and generating a correct differential diagnosis (r=0.46, p<0.01; r=0.41, p=<0.01; r=0.60, p=<0.01, respectively). Conclusion: Internal medicine interns showed variable skill in performing and interpreting a cardiovascular POCUS exam. Further emphasis on teaching cardiovascular POCUS skills would likely increase ability to identify relevant cardiovascular findings and improve patient care.
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.