Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Integration of Diagnostic Lung Ultrasound Into Clinical Practice by Hospitalists in an Academic Medical Center: A Retrospective Chart Review.
Slaugh, John-David; Issa, Meltiady; Grimm, Eric; Calderon, Antonio J; Sindelar, Solomon; Van Hook, Reed; McBeth, Lauren; Maw, Anna.
Afiliação
  • Slaugh JD; Internal Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, USA.
  • Issa M; Hospital Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA.
  • Grimm E; Hospital Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, USA.
  • Calderon AJ; Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, USA.
  • Sindelar S; Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, USA.
  • Van Hook R; Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, USA.
  • McBeth L; Hospital Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, USA.
  • Maw A; Hospital Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, USA.
Cureus ; 16(9): e69796, 2024 Sep.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39308836
ABSTRACT
Background Point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) is a guideline-recommended imaging modality that has been shown to be more accurate than chest radiography for multiple causes of dyspnea. This study was conducted to understand the impact of LUS on real-world clinical decision-making among hospitalists. Methods  A retrospective chart review was conducted of patients who received a LUS while hospitalized at a quaternary care academic medical center between July 2020 and June 2022. Data was extracted from the electronic health record (EHR) into a standardized REDCap form. Cases were defined as patients who had received a LUS that (1) had images archived and accessible to viewing through the EHR and (2) had an imaging report documented in the EHR. Results Of the 820 LUSs reviewed, 297 (36.2%) were performed to evaluate for appropriateness of thoracentesis, 205 (25%) for diagnosing or monitoring of pneumonia related to COVID-19, 169 (20.6%) for volume status assessment, 136 (16.6%) for worsening respiratory status, 114 (13.9%) for monitoring pleural effusions, 64 (7.8%) for diagnosing or monitoring of pneumonia not related to COVID-19, and 12 (1.5%) for monitoring of diuresis. Documentation was sufficient to determine clinical decision-making in 730 (89%) of LUSs reviewed, 739 (90.1%) were considered to be diagnostically useful, and 327 (39.9%) changed management. Conclusions These findings suggest LUS was diagnostically useful and routinely changed management in hospitalist practice. Further, documentation in the EHR was sufficient to allow for the evaluation of real-world clinical decision-making using LUS, which is an important gap in both the education and health services research literature.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Cureus Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Cureus Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos