ArticleCJEM2025
Utilization of cardiac point-of-care ultrasound for atrial fibrillation management by Canadian emergency physicians: a cross-sectional survey.
Article in CJEM, 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionAs point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) applications expand in the emergency department (ED), its utilization within the management of patients presenting with rapid atrial fibrillation (AF) or flutter (AFL) is unclear. The co-morbidity of heart failure and AF/AFL complicates the rate/rhythm control and disposition of this population. ED physicians diagnose heart failure by integrating POCUS left ventricular function assessment, but studies have not focused on the rapid AF/AFL population.
methodsOur survey aimed to explore the use, integration, and perceived barriers of POCUS left ventricular function assessment in AF/AFL patients. Canadian ED physicians and residents who are members of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) completed an online survey through email between February and March 2024.
resultsWe received 91 responses. For patients presenting with rapid AF/AFL with no prior imaging in the last 12 months, 51% of respondents indicated using cardiac POCUS for left ventricular function assessment. Half of respondents indicated that distinguishing between normal and severely reduced left ventricular function with POCUS would help guide management in rapid AF/AFL patients, and 77% responded that it would help guide disposition. A majority, 63% of respondents, agreed the assessment of left ventricular function would assist in determining if they will use calcium channel blockers. Perceived barriers included confidence in interpretation, skill level, machine accessibility, and accuracy of left ventricular function assessment in rapid AF/AFL patients.
conclusionOur survey demonstrated that half of ED physicians and residents are currently integrating POCUS left ventricular function assessment in rapid AF/AFL patients and most adapt their clinical decision making based on their findings, notably in whether or not to use calcium channel blockers. Among the perceived barriers, ED physicians most commonly reported low POCUS expertise level and the accuracy of left ventricular assessment in rapid AF/AFL.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41123756What 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.