Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41469571›Full record

ArticleBMC emergency medicine2025

Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) use in mountain emergency medicine: results from an international online survey.

Niels Holthof, Natalie Hölzl, Juan Manuel Funk, Simon Rauch, Giacomo Strapazzon, Peter Paal

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Niels HolthofDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Inselspital Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland. niels.holthof@insel.ch.ORCID 0000-0001-7065-5131
Natalie HölzlInternational Commission for Mountain Emergency Medicine (ICAR MEDCOM), Zürich, Switzerland.
Juan Manuel FunkInternational Commission for Mountain Emergency Medicine (ICAR MEDCOM), Zürich, Switzerland.
Simon RauchInternational Commission for Mountain Emergency Medicine (ICAR MEDCOM), Zürich, Switzerland.
Giacomo StrapazzonInternational Commission for Mountain Emergency Medicine (ICAR MEDCOM), Zürich, Switzerland.
Peter PaalInternational Commission for Mountain Emergency Medicine (ICAR MEDCOM), Zürich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe extent to which point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is currently being used in international mountain emergency medicine has not yet been investigated. The aim of this study was to determine the use of POCUS in mountain rescue organizations which are members of the International Commission for Alpine Rescue (ICAR).

methodsWe asked 92 ICAR member organizations to complete an online survey to gather information about staffing, ultrasound equipment, indications, perceived utility, and aspects of education and clinical supervision.

resultsOur survey had a response rate of 42% (n = 39). The availability of POCUS in rescue organizations was associated with the type of staffing and rescue provided. Organizations with POCUS (31%, n = 12) were permanently (67%, n = 8; 95%-CI: 35–90%) or intermittently (33%, n = 4; 95%-CI: 10–65%) staffed by physicians (p = 0.006). POCUS was mostly available in organizations with professional staff (58%, n = 7; 95%-CI: 28–85%). In contrast, organizations with voluntary staff mostly did not use POCUS (70%, n = 19; 95%-CI: 50–86%) (p = 0.002). Organizations with POCUS mostly provided a combination of both HEMS and terrestrial rescue (75%, n = 9; 95%-CI: 43–95%), whereas organizations without POCUS (69%, n = 27) mostly provided terrestrial rescue alone (70%, n = 19; 95%-CI: 50–86%) (p = 0.001). Most organizations (67%, n = 8) used POCUS in < 10% of their treated patients. In these select patients, however, POCUS was perceived to change on-site treatment and improve patient outcomes. POCUS was considered equally relevant in both medical and traumatic emergencies. Half of the providers used standardized ultrasound protocols (50%, n = 6). Half of the rescue organizations did not record POCUS findings (50%, n = 6). Most rescue organizations did not have a framework in place for education and clinical supervision (91%, n = 10).

conclusionsOur survey shows that POCUS plays a considerable role in international mountain emergency medicine. POCUS is primarily used by physicians in HEMS but is also available in organizations who provide terrestrial rescue. Most rescue providers use POCUS in select patient groups, with perceived benefits on clinical decision-making and patient outcomes. Although providers often use standardized protocols when performing examinations, aspects of education and clinical supervision will need to be addressed in the future.

Indexed as

Emergency MedicineMountaineeringPoint-of-Care SystemsRescue WorkHealth Care SurveysHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesUltrasonographyEchocardiographyEmergency medicineMountain medicinePOCUSUltrasound

Identifiers

PMID41469571
PMCPMC12865939

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.