SynthesisItalian journal of pediatrics2025
Impact of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in pediatric emergency departments: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Italian journal of pediatrics, 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
Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is a bedside diagnostic tool clinicians use to provide immediate insights and guide therapeutic interventions. It has become increasingly significant in pediatric emergency departments (EDs) for diagnosing conditions, managing critical scenarios, and guiding procedures due to its portability, ease of use, and lack of radiation. This study aims to systematically review and analyze the efficacy of POCUS compared to conventional diagnostic methods in pediatric emergency settings. A literature search was conducted across PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library up to February 2025. The inclusion criteria were pediatric patients aged 1 month to 18 years in EDs, with studies comparing POCUS to conventional methods. Primary outcomes included first-attempt procedural success and overall success rates. Secondary outcomes included time to procedure completion, mean number of attempts, hospitalization rates, and discharge rates. Data analysis was conducted in R employing a random-effects model, with dichotomous data analyzed as risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI), and continuous data as unbiased standardized mean difference (SMD). Statistical significance was defined at p < 0.05. Eighteen randomized controlled trials involving 2264 patients met the inclusion criteria. POCUS significantly improved first-attempt success (RR = 1.25; 95% CI: 1.09-1.43). The overall procedural success showed a significant benefit with POCUS (RR = 1.12; 95% CI: 1.03-1.22). However, no significant differences were noted in the time to procedure completion, number of attempts for a successful procedure, and rates of hospitalization and discharge to home. POCUS significantly improves first-attempt and overall procedural success rates in pediatric emergency settings, although it does not significantly reduce procedure times or the number of attempts. These findings underscore the importance of integrating POCUS into pediatric emergency care to enhance diagnostic accuracy and procedural success, though further research is needed to optimize its implementation across different age groups and 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.