Point-of-care ultrasound to assess left ventricular ejection fraction in heart failure in unselected patients in primary care: a systematic review.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Family practice Pub Date : 2024-08-20 DOI:10.1093/fampra/cmae040
Perrine Allimant, Lucas Guillo, Thomas Fierling, Andry Rabiaza, Isabelle Cibois-Honnorat
{"title":"Point-of-care ultrasound to assess left ventricular ejection fraction in heart failure in unselected patients in primary care: a systematic review.","authors":"Perrine Allimant, Lucas Guillo, Thomas Fierling, Andry Rabiaza, Isabelle Cibois-Honnorat","doi":"10.1093/fampra/cmae040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Heart failure (HF) is the most frequent cardiovascular pathology in primary care. Echocardiography is the gold standard for diagnosis, follow-up, and prognosis of HF. Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is of growing interest in daily practice.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study aimed to systematically review the literature to evaluate left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) assessment of unselected patients in primary care by non-expert physicians with cardiac POCUS (cPOCUS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched in Medline, Embase, and Pubmed up to January 2024 for interventional and non-interventional studies assessing LVEF with cPOCUS in unselected patients with suspected or diagnosed HF in hospital or outpatient settings, performed by non-expert physicians.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-two studies were included, involving 6598 patients, of whom 60.2% were outpatients. LVEF was assessed by 351 non-expert physicians after an initial ultrasound training course. The LVEF was mainly assessed by visual estimation (90.2%). The most frequent views were parasternal long/short axis, and apical 4-chamber. The median time of cPOCUS was 8 minutes. A strong agreement was found (κ = 0.72 [0.63; 0.83]) compared to experts when using different types of ultrasound devices (hand-held and standard), and agreement was excellent (κ = 0.84 [0.71; 0.89]) with the same device. Training course combined a median of 4.5 hours for theory and 25 cPOCUS for practice.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The use of cPOCUS by non-expert physicians after a short training course appears to be an accurate complementary tool for LVEF assessment in daily practice. Its diffusion in primary care could optimize patient management, without replacing specialist assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":12209,"journal":{"name":"Family practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmae040","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Heart failure (HF) is the most frequent cardiovascular pathology in primary care. Echocardiography is the gold standard for diagnosis, follow-up, and prognosis of HF. Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is of growing interest in daily practice.

Aim: This study aimed to systematically review the literature to evaluate left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) assessment of unselected patients in primary care by non-expert physicians with cardiac POCUS (cPOCUS).

Methods: We searched in Medline, Embase, and Pubmed up to January 2024 for interventional and non-interventional studies assessing LVEF with cPOCUS in unselected patients with suspected or diagnosed HF in hospital or outpatient settings, performed by non-expert physicians.

Results: Forty-two studies were included, involving 6598 patients, of whom 60.2% were outpatients. LVEF was assessed by 351 non-expert physicians after an initial ultrasound training course. The LVEF was mainly assessed by visual estimation (90.2%). The most frequent views were parasternal long/short axis, and apical 4-chamber. The median time of cPOCUS was 8 minutes. A strong agreement was found (κ = 0.72 [0.63; 0.83]) compared to experts when using different types of ultrasound devices (hand-held and standard), and agreement was excellent (κ = 0.84 [0.71; 0.89]) with the same device. Training course combined a median of 4.5 hours for theory and 25 cPOCUS for practice.

Conclusion: The use of cPOCUS by non-expert physicians after a short training course appears to be an accurate complementary tool for LVEF assessment in daily practice. Its diffusion in primary care could optimize patient management, without replacing specialist assessment.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在基层医疗机构对未经选择的心力衰竭患者进行护理点超声波评估左心室射血分数:系统性综述。
背景:心力衰竭(HF心力衰竭(HF)是初级医疗中最常见的心血管疾病。超声心动图是诊断、随访和预后心力衰竭的金标准。目的:本研究旨在系统地回顾文献,评估非专业医生使用心脏超声心动图(POCUS,cPOCUS)对初级保健中未选择的患者进行左室射血分数(LVEF)评估的情况:截至 2024 年 1 月,我们在 Medline、Embase 和 Pubmed 上检索了由非专业医生在医院或门诊环境中使用 cPOCUS 对未经选择的疑似或诊断为 HF 的患者进行 LVEF 评估的干预性和非干预性研究:共纳入 42 项研究,涉及 6598 名患者,其中 60.2% 为门诊患者。351 名非专业医师在接受了初步超声培训课程后对 LVEF 进行了评估。LVEF 主要通过目测评估(90.2%)。最常用的切面是胸骨旁长/短轴切面和心尖四腔切面。cPOCUS 的中位时间为 8 分钟。在使用不同类型的超声设备(手持式和标准式)时,与专家的一致性很高(κ = 0.72 [0.63; 0.83]),在使用同一设备时,与专家的一致性很好(κ = 0.84 [0.71; 0.89])。培训课程的理论时间中位数为 4.5 小时,实践时间中位数为 25 cPOCUS:结论:经过短期培训后,非专业医生使用 cPOCUS 似乎是日常工作中评估 LVEF 的准确补充工具。在初级医疗保健中推广该工具可优化患者管理,而不会取代专科医生的评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Family practice
Family practice 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
9.10%
发文量
144
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Family Practice is an international journal aimed at practitioners, teachers, and researchers in the fields of family medicine, general practice, and primary care in both developed and developing countries. Family Practice offers its readership an international view of the problems and preoccupations in the field, while providing a medium of instruction and exploration. The journal''s range and content covers such areas as health care delivery, epidemiology, public health, and clinical case studies. The journal aims to be interdisciplinary and contributions from other disciplines of medicine and social science are always welcomed.
期刊最新文献
Impact of implementing primary care-based medication for opioid use disorder on provider and staff perceptions. The effect and implementation of the COVID Box, a remote patient monitoring system for patients with a COVID-19 infection in primary care: a matched cohort study. Can patient education initiatives in primary care increase patient knowledge of appropriate antibiotic use and decrease expectations for unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions? Clinical effects of accreditation in general practice: a pragmatic randomized controlled study. School absence policy and healthcare use: a difference-in-difference cohort analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1