ArticleJournal of clinical ultrasound : JCU2026
Clinical Use of Lung Ultrasound by Emergency and Intensive Care Physicians: A Swiss National Survey.
Article in Journal of clinical ultrasound : JCU, 2026. 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.
- Diagnostic imaging modalities in Dyspnoea and suspected acute heart failure: a systematic review with Meta-analysis.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2026Article
- Clinical Use of Lung Ultrasound by Emergency and Intensive Care Physicians: A Swiss National Survey.Journal of clinical ultrasound : JCU · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeLung ultrasound (LUS) has gained popularity in the emergency department (ED) and intensive care unit (ICU). However, little is known about its use, training, indications, and implementation barriers. Therefore, we performed a survey to evaluate the current practice of LUS among ED and ICU physicians with varying experience levels across regions in Switzerland.
methodsA 27-question online survey was disseminated across 108 EDs and 75 ICUs using snowball sampling via department heads.
resultsOf all 198 participants from 183 invited departments (49.0% ED physicians, 42.3% ICU physicians, 8.7% from other specialties), 190 (95.5%) use ultrasound and 164 (82.8%) use LUS in their clinical practice. Predominantly, LUS is utilized for evaluating dyspnea (95.9%), shock (76.2%), and hypoxemia (73.5%). ICU physicians used LUS more for invasive procedures, while less experienced physicians had lower certification rates. Standardized protocols for LUS examination or documentation were reported by only 22.5% and 38.9% of responders, respectively. The main barriers identified were time constraints, lack of training opportunities, and underestimation of LUSs diagnostic value.
conclusionsLUS is widely adopted and considered highly relevant by ED and ICU physicians. However, disparities in usage and proficiency were observed between ICU and non-ICU physicians, as well as between more and less experienced practitioners. Addressing the identified training gaps and promoting standardized protocol adoption are imperative for optimizing LUSs integration into 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.