Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42550708›Full record

ArticleThe western journal of emergency medicine2026

Impact Evaluation of a Clinical Point-of-care Ultrasound Intervention in an Academic Emergency Department.

Alyssa Platt, Timothy Peterson, Erica Peethumnongsin, Maragatha Kuchibhatla, Rebecca G Theophanous

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The western journal of emergency medicine, 2026. 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

5 authors.

Alyssa PlattDuke University School of Medicine, Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Durham, North Carolina.
Timothy PetersonDuke University School of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Durham, North Carolina.
Erica PeethumnongsinDuke University School of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Durham, North Carolina.
Maragatha KuchibhatlaDuke University School of Medicine, Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Durham, North Carolina.
Rebecca G TheophanousDuke University School of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Durham, North Carolina.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPoint-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) can expedite patient diagnoses and improve procedural safety in emergency department (ED) patients. Nevertheless, clinical POCUS use lags in many ED sites nationwide, with only 40% of community physicians using POCUS according to a study from 2019-2021. We studied the impact of a multifaceted clinical POCUS intervention to address barriers and increase clinical POCUS use.

methodsWe conducted a prospective cohort study at a single academic hospital that included ED attendings, residents, and advance practice clinicians (APC). A multifaceted four-week intervention for emergency clinicians from December 2023-January 2024 addressed barriers to POCUS use identified on a pre- and post-intervention survey. The intervention included POCUS education during clinical shifts by ultrasound faculty, clinical POCUS workflow demonstration during resident conference/faculty meetings, and QR code reference files on machines for a total of two hours of additional training per clinician. The primary outcome was the number of clinical ED POCUS performed during the 18 months pre-intervention and 12 months post-intervention. Secondary outcomes were POCUS workflow knowledge exam scores and POCUS revenue. We analyzed clinical POCUS numbers from July 2022-December 2024 using an interrupted time series model.

resultsForty-two of 99 emergency clinicians (42.4%) responded to surveys pre-intervention and 28 post-intervention (28.3%). Fifty-six physicians/APCs (56.6%) participated in the in-person POCUS intervention (17 attendings, 34 residents, 5 APCs). The unadjusted number of POCUS exams performed increased from 6,708 pre-intervention (18 months) to 11,600 post-intervention (12 months). After controlling for the underlying secular trend, we saw no effect of the intervention with no significant increase in overall number of POCUS exams performed per 100 ED patients after the intervention (mean level change = -0.81, 95% CI, -2.43 to 0.82; P = .33). Neither was there an increase in the slope of the secular trend post-intervention (difference in slope, β = 0.00, 95% CI, -0.10 to 0.10; P = .98 for post-intervention, β = 0.02, 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.12 for sustainability period). Monthly POCUS revenue increased ~$55,000 in total billed and $10,000 reimbursed (~16% reimbursement). This was the professional component only that was billed by the physician and not the technical component covering equipment and maintenance. Post-intervention mean knowledge scores were 88% correct (standard deviation 12.0) with 16/22 participants (72.7%) passing the assessment (score > 90%).

conclusionA multifaceted intervention was not shown to improve clinical point-of-care ultrasound use and revenue when accounting for an underlying sustained secular upward trend in number of POCUS exams performed per 100 emergency department patients throughout the study period. Future interventions directed toward low POCUS users and identification of clinical POCUS champions may improve clinical POCUS use.

Indexed as

Emergency Service, HospitalPoint-of-Care SystemsAcademic Medical CentersHumansProspective StudiesUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID42550708
PMCPMC13436672

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.