ArticleJAMA network open2025
Perspectives on Point-of-Care Ultrasonography Credentialing and Privileging: A Qualitative Study.
Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A serious video game for teaching basic point-of-care echocardiography skills: a non-inferiority trial.BMC medical education · 2026Trial
- Impact of Transitioning From Application-Specific to Global Point-of-Care Ultrasound Privileging on Utilization and Emergency Department Length of Stay.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2026Article
- Utilization of point-of-care ultrasound and associated factors among emergency physicians in Henan Province, China: a multicenter cross-sectional survey.Frontiers in public health · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS) use is rapidly expanding across several acute care specialties, yet no defined standards currently exist to guide health systems in regulation of POCUS use or clinician best practices. Objective: To describe existing POCUS credentialing and privileging policy design and implementation in a purposive sample of health care institutions across the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study used a cross-sectional, mixed-methods analysis of POCUS policies and procedures conducted between July 23 and October 28, 2024, and was guided by the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) framework. Qualitative analyses used an interpretive phenomenological approach. Participants were POCUS leaders at health care institutions with existing POCUS policies, representing diverse geographic areas, sizes, and practice settings. Exposures: Thirty-item online survey and 60-minute key informant structured interviews. Main Outcomes and Measures: Quantitative survey findings and qualitative analyses of current POCUS policies and practice patterns related to content, implementation, adoption, facilitators, and barriers to use. Results: Twenty survey and interview participants were included (mean [SD] age, 41.17 [3.79] years; 15 [75.0%] male) and 19 POCUS policies were analyzed. Interviewees reported that successful policy development was influenced by contextual factors (eg, institutional motivators, external forces), policy infrastructure, diverse stakeholder engagement, ability to anticipate and address multilevel barriers, and strategies to maximize policy reach, adoption, and sustainability. Key insights from interviewees highlighted the importance of multidisciplinary POCUS committees and purposeful policy design tailored to align with institutional POCUS practice patterns and values. Leaders stressed the need for careful consideration of policy outcomes and institutional capabilities prior to implementation. While features of policies varied, most delineated specific POCUS applications within the policy and all required institutional training or proctoring from institutional POCUS champions. Conclusions and Relevance: This study identified common themes and barriers in POCUS implementation and strategies used by exemplar institutions to aid other programs in addressing POCUS privileging and establishing standards for safe and effective POCUS use in patient care. The findings suggest POCUS policy development is important for standardizing its use within institutions, guiding training requirements, and establishing oversight procedures.
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.