Micah L A Heldeweg, Lian Vermue, Max Kant, Michelle Brouwer, Armand R J Girbes, Mark E Haaksma, Leo M A Heunks, Amne Mousa, Jasper M Smit, Thomas W Smits, Frederique Paulus, Johannes C F Ket, Marcus J Schultz, Pieter Roel Tuinman
{"title":"The impact of lung ultrasound on clinical-decision making across departments: a systematic review.","authors":"Micah L A Heldeweg, Lian Vermue, Max Kant, Michelle Brouwer, Armand R J Girbes, Mark E Haaksma, Leo M A Heunks, Amne Mousa, Jasper M Smit, Thomas W Smits, Frederique Paulus, Johannes C F Ket, Marcus J Schultz, Pieter Roel Tuinman","doi":"10.1186/s13089-021-00253-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Lung ultrasound has established itself as an accurate diagnostic tool in different clinical settings. However, its effects on clinical-decision making are insufficiently described. This systematic review aims to investigate the impact of lung ultrasound, exclusively or as part of an integrated thoracic ultrasound examination, on clinical-decision making in different departments, especially the emergency department (ED), intensive care unit (ICU), and general ward (GW).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42021242977). PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched for original studies reporting changes in clinical-decision making (e.g. diagnosis, management, or therapy) after using lung ultrasound. Inclusion criteria were a recorded change of management (in percentage of cases) and with a clinical presentation to the ED, ICU, or GW. Studies were excluded if examinations were beyond the scope of thoracic ultrasound or to guide procedures. Mean changes with range (%) in clinical-decision making were reported. Methodological data on lung ultrasound were also collected. Study quality was scored using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 13 studies were included: five studies on the ED (546 patients), five studies on the ICU (504 patients), two studies on the GW (1150 patients), and one study across all three wards (41 patients). Lung ultrasound changed the diagnosis in mean 33% (15-44%) and 44% (34-58%) of patients in the ED and ICU, respectively. Lung ultrasound changed the management in mean 48% (20-80%), 42% (30-68%) and 48% (48-48%) of patients in the ED, in the ICU and in the GW, respectively. Changes in management were non-invasive in 92% and 51% of patients in the ED and ICU, respectively. Lung ultrasound methodology was heterogeneous across studies. Risk of bias was moderate to high in all studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Lung ultrasound, exclusively or as a part of thoracic ultrasound, has substantial impact on clinical-decision making by changing diagnosis and management in the EDs, ICUs, and GWs. The current evidence level and methodological heterogeneity underline the necessity for well-designed trials and standardization of methodology.</p>","PeriodicalId":36911,"journal":{"name":"Ultrasound Journal","volume":" ","pages":"5"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8748548/pdf/","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ultrasound Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13089-021-00253-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14
Abstract
Background: Lung ultrasound has established itself as an accurate diagnostic tool in different clinical settings. However, its effects on clinical-decision making are insufficiently described. This systematic review aims to investigate the impact of lung ultrasound, exclusively or as part of an integrated thoracic ultrasound examination, on clinical-decision making in different departments, especially the emergency department (ED), intensive care unit (ICU), and general ward (GW).
Methods: This systematic review was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42021242977). PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched for original studies reporting changes in clinical-decision making (e.g. diagnosis, management, or therapy) after using lung ultrasound. Inclusion criteria were a recorded change of management (in percentage of cases) and with a clinical presentation to the ED, ICU, or GW. Studies were excluded if examinations were beyond the scope of thoracic ultrasound or to guide procedures. Mean changes with range (%) in clinical-decision making were reported. Methodological data on lung ultrasound were also collected. Study quality was scored using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.
Results: A total of 13 studies were included: five studies on the ED (546 patients), five studies on the ICU (504 patients), two studies on the GW (1150 patients), and one study across all three wards (41 patients). Lung ultrasound changed the diagnosis in mean 33% (15-44%) and 44% (34-58%) of patients in the ED and ICU, respectively. Lung ultrasound changed the management in mean 48% (20-80%), 42% (30-68%) and 48% (48-48%) of patients in the ED, in the ICU and in the GW, respectively. Changes in management were non-invasive in 92% and 51% of patients in the ED and ICU, respectively. Lung ultrasound methodology was heterogeneous across studies. Risk of bias was moderate to high in all studies.
Conclusions: Lung ultrasound, exclusively or as a part of thoracic ultrasound, has substantial impact on clinical-decision making by changing diagnosis and management in the EDs, ICUs, and GWs. The current evidence level and methodological heterogeneity underline the necessity for well-designed trials and standardization of methodology.
背景:肺超声在不同的临床环境中已成为一种准确的诊断工具。然而,它对临床决策的影响没有得到充分的描述。本系统综述旨在探讨肺部超声检查(单独或作为综合胸部超声检查的一部分)对不同科室,特别是急诊科(ED)、重症监护病房(ICU)和普通病房(GW)临床决策的影响。方法:本系统评价在PROSPERO注册(CRD42021242977)。我们检索了PubMed、EMBASE和Web of Science中报告使用肺部超声后临床决策(如诊断、管理或治疗)变化的原始研究。纳入标准是记录的管理变更(以病例的百分比计算),并在ED、ICU或GW有临床表现。如果检查超出了胸部超声或指导手术的范围,则排除研究。报告了临床决策的平均变化范围(%)。同时收集肺超声方法学资料。使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表对研究质量进行评分。结果:共纳入13项研究:5项关于急诊科的研究(546例患者),5项关于ICU的研究(504例患者),2项关于GW的研究(1150例患者),1项关于所有3个病房的研究(41例患者)。在ED和ICU中,肺部超声改变诊断的比例分别为33%(15-44%)和44%(34-58%)。在ED、ICU和GW中,肺超声分别改变了平均48%(20-80%)、42%(30-68%)和48%(48-48%)的患者的治疗方法。在ED和ICU中,分别有92%和51%的患者的管理改变是非侵入性的。不同研究的肺部超声方法学存在差异。所有研究的偏倚风险均为中等至高。结论:肺部超声,单独或作为胸部超声的一部分,通过改变急诊科、icu和GWs的诊断和管理,对临床决策有重大影响。目前的证据水平和方法的异质性强调了设计良好的试验和方法标准化的必要性。