TY - JOUR

T1 - Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasound in Emergency Medicine

T2 - A Scoping Review With an Interactive Database

AU - Ovesen, Stig Holm

AU - Clausen, Andreas Hvilshøj

AU - Kirkegaard, Hans

AU - Løfgren, Bo

AU - Aagaard, Rasmus

AU - Skaarup, Søren Helbo

AU - Arvig, Michael Dan

AU - Lorentzen, Morten Hjarnø

AU - Kristensen, Anne Heltborg

AU - Cartuliares, Mariana Bichuette

AU - Falster, Casper

AU - Tong, Liting

AU - Rabajoli, Alessandra

AU - Leth, Ronja

AU - Desy, Janeve

AU - Ma, Irene W.Y.

AU - Weile, Jesper

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2024 The Author(s)

PY - 2024

Y1 - 2024

N2 - Background: This scoping review was conducted to provide an overview of the evidence of point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) in emergency medicine. By emphasizing clinical topics, time trends, study designs, and the scope of the primary outcomes, a map is provided for physicians and researchers to guide their future initiatives. Research Question: Which study designs and primary outcomes are reported in published studies of LUS in emergency medicine? Study Design and Methods: We performed a systematic search in the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases for LUS studies published prior to May 13, 2023. Study characteristics were synthesized quantitatively. The primary outcomes in all papers were categorized into the hierarchical Fryback and Thornbury levels. Results: A total of 4,076 papers were screened and, following selection and handsearching, 406 papers were included. The number of publications doubled from January 2020 to May 2023 (204 to 406 papers). The study designs were primarily observational (n = 375 [92%]), followed by randomized (n = 18 [4%]) and case series (n = 13 [3%]). The primary outcome measure concerned diagnostic accuracy in 319 papers (79%), diagnostic thinking in 32 (8%), therapeutic changes in 4 (1%), and patient outcomes in 14 (3%). No increase in the proportions of randomized controlled trials or the scope of primary outcome measures was observed with time. A freely available interactive database was created to enable readers to search for any given interest (https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/blinded/viz/LUSinEM_240216/INFO). Interpretation: Observational diagnostic studies have been produced in abundance, leaving a paucity of research exploring clinical utility. Notably, research exploring whether LUS causes changes to clinical decisions is imperative prior to any further research being made into patient benefits.

AB - Background: This scoping review was conducted to provide an overview of the evidence of point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) in emergency medicine. By emphasizing clinical topics, time trends, study designs, and the scope of the primary outcomes, a map is provided for physicians and researchers to guide their future initiatives. Research Question: Which study designs and primary outcomes are reported in published studies of LUS in emergency medicine? Study Design and Methods: We performed a systematic search in the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases for LUS studies published prior to May 13, 2023. Study characteristics were synthesized quantitatively. The primary outcomes in all papers were categorized into the hierarchical Fryback and Thornbury levels. Results: A total of 4,076 papers were screened and, following selection and handsearching, 406 papers were included. The number of publications doubled from January 2020 to May 2023 (204 to 406 papers). The study designs were primarily observational (n = 375 [92%]), followed by randomized (n = 18 [4%]) and case series (n = 13 [3%]). The primary outcome measure concerned diagnostic accuracy in 319 papers (79%), diagnostic thinking in 32 (8%), therapeutic changes in 4 (1%), and patient outcomes in 14 (3%). No increase in the proportions of randomized controlled trials or the scope of primary outcome measures was observed with time. A freely available interactive database was created to enable readers to search for any given interest (https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/blinded/viz/LUSinEM_240216/INFO). Interpretation: Observational diagnostic studies have been produced in abundance, leaving a paucity of research exploring clinical utility. Notably, research exploring whether LUS causes changes to clinical decisions is imperative prior to any further research being made into patient benefits.

KW - emergency medicine

KW - lung ultrasound

KW - respiratory symptoms

U2 - 10.1016/j.chest.2024.02.053

DO - 10.1016/j.chest.2024.02.053

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 38458431

AN - SCOPUS:85197159795

JO - Chest

JF - Chest

SN - 0012-3692

ER -