ArticleInternal and emergency medicine2026
PoCUS-first versus CT-only for non-traumatic abdominal pain: a propensity score-weighted cohort study on ED resource utilization.
Article in Internal and emergency medicine, 2026. 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.
- Risk factors for mis-triage between medical and surgical causes in emergency patients with non-traumatic abdominal pain: a retrospective study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Association Between Early Point-of-Care Ultrasound and Emergency Department Outcomes in Admitted Patients with Non-Traumatic Abdominal Pain: A Propensity Score-Weighted Cohort Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Emergency Department Disposition and Point-of-Care Ultrasound in Biliary Disease: Propensity-Weighted Cohort Study.The western journal of emergency medicine · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) may reduce emergency department (ED) length of stay (LOS) for selected abdominal diagnoses, but its role in undifferentiated, non-traumatic abdominal pain remains uncertain. This study compared PoCUS-first and CT-only strategies, evaluating associations with resource use and clinical outcomes in adult ED patients. This propensity score-weighted cohort study included adults (≥ 18 years) presenting with non-traumatic abdominal pain to the ED of a tertiary medical center in Taiwan between January 2021 and December 2023. Patients transferred or discharged against medical advice from other facilities were excluded. Encounters were classified as PoCUS-first (PoCUS alone and followed by CT) or CT-only. Primary outcomes were ED LOS and costs; secondary outcomes were unscheduled return visit (URV), hospital LOS, total costs, ICU admission, and in-hospital mortality. Multivariate regression and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) adjusted for baseline differences. Among 26,403 index ED visits, 67.5% received PoCUS‑first evaluation and 32.5% underwent CT only. After adjustment, PoCUS‑first was associated with substantially shorter ED LOS (ratio of means 0.53, 95% CI 0.52-0.54; 47% reduction), lower ED costs (0.52, 95% CI 0.51-0.53; 48% reduction), fewer consultations, and reduced admission rates. In patients discharged at the index visit (n = 17,390), PoCUS‑first was similarly linked to shorter LOS (0.61, 95% CI 0.60-0.62; 39% reduction), markedly lower costs (0.47, 95% CI 0.46-0.47; 53% reduction), and decreased odds of unscheduled return visits (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.69-0.96), without an increase in adverse outcomes. For patients later admitted after a return visit, PoCUS‑first encounters were characterized by lower resource use during the index ED visit, with no evidence of prolonged subsequent care or safety concerns. A PoCUS‑first strategy, used for initial risk stratification, was associated with greater ED efficiency and more judicious resource use without compromising safety. However, the observed reduction in ED LOS may partly reflect local workflow and in‑house processes, and residual confounding cannot be excluded. Confirmation in prospective, multicenter studies is warranted.
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.