ArticleBMC medical education2026
Point-of-care ultrasound in prehospital emergency care: attitudes, facilitators and barriers.
Article in BMC medical education, 2026. 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.
- Barriers and Facilitators to Point-of-Care Ultrasound Utilization Among Emergency Medicine Residents and Emergency Nurse Practitioners Following Institutional Training.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to explore Emergency Medical Services (EMS) providers' perceptions of prehospital Point-of-Care Ultrasound (POCUS), including perceived usefulness, facilitators, and barriers to its implementing in Jordanian prehospital settings.
methodsA multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted among EMS providers using a structured questionnaire. Attitudes were measured using a four-point Likert scale, while facilitators and barriers were assessed with dichotomous (yes/no) responses. A total attitude score was calculated by summing Likert-scale responses. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize responses and inferential analyses (independent-samples t-tests and ANOVA) were conducted to examine group differences. Internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha and Kuder-Richardson Formula 20 (KR-20).
resultsA total of 621 participants were included in the study. The majority were males (78.3%), with a mean age of 29.5 ± 4.4 years and EMS experience of 9.7 ± 4.6 years. Only 23.3% reported previous POCUS training. Overall, participants demonstrated a net positive attitude toward POCUS (mean score = 27.9 ± 5.4; Cronbach's α = 0.836), though a substantial proportion (50.0%) expressed uncertainty regarding an absolute POCUS safety claim, a pattern that was independent of prior training status. A proportion of 79.6% expressed willingness to learn about POCUS, 79.4% agreed that POCUS supports standard assessment and 78.8% agreed that POCUS provides additional information for decision-making. The three main reported motivators were training availability (83.1%), direct supervision during use (81.8%) and institutional support (79.4%). The three main barriers were lack of time (76.7%), unavailability of training programs (74.2%) and lack of POCUS experts (73.4%). Participants with prior POCUS training had significantly higher attitude scores (p = .001).
conclusionEMS providers in Jordan demonstrated a net positive attitude toward POCUS as a potentially useful adjunct to prehospital care, though a substantial proportion expressed safety-related uncertainty, consistent with the absence of routine operational exposure to the technology. Adoption of POCUS remains constrained by structural and training-related barriers. These findings reflect perceived value rather than demonstrated clinical effectiveness. Addressing gaps in training, supervision, competency-based credentialing and imaging governance may support future integration, but further research is required to evaluate clinical and operational outcomes.
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.