Dataset Information

Hand-Held Ultrasound Devices Compared with High-End Ultrasound Systems: A Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to review the scientific literature available on the comparison of hand-held ultrasound devices with high-end systems for abdominal and pleural applications. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane were searched following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Original research describing hand-held ultrasound devices compared with high-end systems was included and assessed using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2. The search was limited to articles published since 1 January 2012. A total of 2486 articles were found and screened by title and abstract. A total of 16 articles were chosen for final review. All of the included articles showed good overall agreement between hand-held and high-end ultrasound systems. Strong correlations were found when evaluating ascites, hydronephrosis, pleural cavities, in detection of abdominal aortic aneurysms and for use with obstetric and gynaecological patients. Other articles found good agreement for cholelithiasis and for determining the best site for paracentesis. QUADAS-2 analysis suggested few risks of bias and almost no concerns regarding applicability. For distinct clinical questions, hand-held devices may be a valuable supplement to physical examination. However, evidence is inadequate, and more research is needed on the abdominal and pleural use of hand-held ultrasound with more standardised comparisons, using only blinded reviewers.

SUBMITTER: Rykkje A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6628329 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Hand-Held Ultrasound Devices Compared with High-End Ultrasound Systems: A Systematic Review.

Rykkje Alexander A Carlsen Jonathan Frederik JF Nielsen Michael Bachmann MB

Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) 20190615 2

The aim of this study was to review the scientific literature available on the comparison of hand-held ultrasound devices with high-end systems for abdominal and pleural applications. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane were searched following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Original research describing hand-held ultrasound devices compared with high-end systems was included and assessed using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accura ...[more]

PMID: 31208078

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background:The diagnostic performance of an automated breast volume scanner (ABVS) compared with that of a hand-held ultrasound (HHUS) for breast cancer remains unclear. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic performances of the ABVS and HHUS for breast cancer. Methods:We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and SinoMed databases to identify eligible studies up until November 14, 2018. Studies comparing ABVS and HHUS for differentiating benign and malignant breast tumors were included. A meta-analysis was performed to generate pooled diagnostic accuracy parameters [sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), area under the curve (AUC), and the Q* index] and detection rates for ABVS and HHUS. Results:Nine studies involving 1,376 patients and 1,527 lesions were included in the meta-analysis for diagnostic accuracy. The pooled sensitivity was 0.93 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.91-0.95] for ABVS and 0.90 (95% CI, 0.88-0.92) for HHUS, and the pooled specificity was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.83-0.88) for ABVS and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.79-0.84) for HHUS. The pooled DOR was 88.66 (95% CI, 51.44-152.78) for ABVS and 41.06 for HHUS (95% CI, 26.58-63.42). The AUC of the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) was 0.9496 for ABVS and 0.9143 for HHUS, and the Q* index was 0.8899 for ABVS and 0.8469 for HHUS. Meta-regression showed no significant difference between the diagnostic accuracy of ABVS and HHUS (P=0.0771). No publication bias was found. Thirteen published studies involving 1,047 pathologically confirmed malignant lesions were included to generate a pooled detection rate. The pooled detection rate was 1.00 (95% CI, 1.00-1.00) for both ABVS and HHUS, for which a publication bias was found. Conclusions:ABVS can be used as an appropriate screening tool for breast cancer as well as HHUS in diagnostic accuracy and detection rate. Considering other advantages of ABVS including non-radioactivity, sensitivity to dense breast, three-dimensional reconstruction, time-saving and repeatability, it might be a promising screening tool for young or dense-breast women in the future.

Project description:BackgroundPoint-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) plays a prominent role in the timely recognition and management of multiple medical, surgical, and obstetric conditions. A POCUS training program for primary healthcare providers in rural Kenya was developed in 2013. A significant challenge to this program is the acquisition of reasonably priced ultrasound machines with adequate image quality and the ability to transmit images for remote review. The goal of this study is to compare the utility of a smartphone-connected, hand-held ultrasound with a traditional ultrasound device for image acquisition and interpretation by trained healthcare providers in Kenya.MethodsThis study took place during a routine re-training and testing session for healthcare providers who had already received POCUS training. The testing session involved a locally validated Observed Structured Clinical Exam (OSCE) that assessed trainees' skills in performing the Extended Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (E-FAST) and focused obstetric exams. Each trainee performed the OSCE twice, once using a smartphone-connected hand-held ultrasound and once using their notebook ultrasound model.ResultsFive trainees obtained a total of 120 images and were scored on image quality and interpretation. Overall E-FAST imaging quality scores were significantly higher for the notebook ultrasound compared to the hand-held ultrasound but there was no significant difference in image interpretation. Overall focused obstetric image quality and image interpretation scores were the same for both ultrasound systems. When separated into individual E-FAST and focused obstetric views, there were no statistically significant differences in the image quality or image interpretation scores between the two ultrasound systems. Images obtained using the hand-held ultrasound were uploaded to the associated cloud storage using a local 3G-cell phone network. Upload times were 2-3 min.ConclusionAmong POCUS trainees in rural Kenya, the hand-held ultrasound was found to be non-inferior to the traditional notebook ultrasound for focused obstetric image quality, focused obstetric image interpretation, and E-FAST image interpretation. However, hand-held ultrasound use was found to be inferior for E-FAST image quality. These differences were not observed when evaluating each E-FAST and focused obstetric views separately. The hand-held ultrasound allowed for rapid image transmission for remote review.

Project description:BackgroundWork-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs), also referred to as work-related musculoskeletal injuries (MSKIs), cause surgeons pain and discomfort. Implementing ergonomics in the operating room has helped reduce such symptoms. However, there are still many issues that surgeons face when dealing with medical instruments, especially among female surgeons or surgeons with smaller hands.MethodsThe Cochrane methodology for performing a systematic review was utilized to search five databases for pertinent literature based on the study question "Do female surgeons or surgeons with smaller hand size, who use surgical instruments have an increased risk of musculoskeletal disorders and discomfort compared to male or larger handed surgeons?". The literature search strategy was designed around the three conceptual domains of surgeons/surgery, smaller hand size, and instrumentation. We searched PubMed, Embase.com, CINAHL Plus with Full Text (EBSCOhost), Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection. This exploration identified 2165 research publications, and after specific inclusion and exclusion criteria, 19 studies were included in the systematic review. Risk of bias analysis was conducted to assess the quality of the included studies. After conducting a heterogeneity test, a meta-analysis was not performed due to high heterogeneity.ResultsUsing certain surgical instruments presents challenges in the form of MSKIs for female and smaller-handed surgeons. Studies showed that 77% of females and 73% of surgeons who wear < 6.5 glove size report musculoskeletal issues ranging from difficulty of use to pain. Difficulties using surgical instruments and reported injuries have a greater impact on surgical trainees which might deter interest in surgical fields for future proceduralists. Recommendations for improved ergonomic tool design are suggested by some of the included studies to help tackle the MSKIs that surgeons face when performing operations.ConclusionsThe number of female surgeons has increased substantially in the last decade. Hence, there exists an urgent need to address the major challenges they encounter by focusing on this specific aspect of workplace safety and health to mitigate injury. Doing so will yield a productive environment while simultaneously protecting the health and safety of both surgeons and patients.Systematic review registrationThe study protocol was registered on PROSPERO (ID: CRD42022283378).

Project description:BackgroundHand hygiene is one of the most effective ways of preventing health care-associated infections and reducing their transmission. Owing to recent advances in sensing technologies, electronic hand hygiene monitoring systems have been integrated into the daily routines of health care workers to measure their hand hygiene compliance and quality.ObjectiveThis review aims to summarize the latest technologies adopted in electronic hand hygiene monitoring systems and discuss the capabilities and limitations of these systems.MethodsA systematic search of PubMed, ACM Digital Library, and IEEE Xplore Digital Library was performed following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Studies were initially screened and assessed independently by the 2 authors, and disagreements between them were further summarized and resolved by discussion with the senior author.ResultsIn total, 1035 publications were retrieved by the search queries; of the 1035 papers, 89 (8.60%) fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were retained for review. In summary, 73 studies used electronic monitoring systems to monitor hand hygiene compliance, including application-assisted direct observation (5/73, 7%), camera-assisted observation (10/73, 14%), sensor-assisted observation (29/73, 40%), and real-time locating system (32/73, 44%). A total of 21 studies evaluated hand hygiene quality, consisting of compliance with the World Health Organization 6-step hand hygiene techniques (14/21, 67%) and surface coverage or illumination reduction of fluorescent substances (7/21, 33%).ConclusionsElectronic hand hygiene monitoring systems face issues of accuracy, data integration, privacy and confidentiality, usability, associated costs, and infrastructure improvements. Moreover, this review found that standardized measurement tools to evaluate system performance are lacking; thus, future research is needed to establish standardized metrics to measure system performance differences among electronic hand hygiene monitoring systems. Furthermore, with sensing technologies and algorithms continually advancing, more research is needed on their implementation to improve system performance and address other hand hygiene-related issues.

Dataset Information

Hand-Held Ultrasound Devices Compared with High-End Ultrasound Systems: A Systematic Review.

Publications

Hand-Held Ultrasound Devices Compared with High-End Ultrasound Systems: A Systematic Review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets