Cargando…

The Area method: a new method for ultrasound assessment of diaphragmatic movement

BACKGROUND: Ultrasound can be used to assess diaphragm movement. Existing methods focus on movement at a single point at the hemidiaphragm and may not consider the anatomic and functional complexity. We aimed to develop an ultrasound method, the Area method, to assess movement of the entire hemidiap...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Skaarup, Søren Helbo, Løkke, Anders, Laursen, Christian B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Milan 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6019663/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29946769
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13089-018-0092-5
_version_ 1783335157207400448
author Skaarup, Søren Helbo
Løkke, Anders
Laursen, Christian B.
author_facet Skaarup, Søren Helbo
Løkke, Anders
Laursen, Christian B.
author_sort Skaarup, Søren Helbo
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Ultrasound can be used to assess diaphragm movement. Existing methods focus on movement at a single point at the hemidiaphragm and may not consider the anatomic and functional complexity. We aimed to develop an ultrasound method, the Area method, to assess movement of the entire hemidiaphragm dome and to compare it with existing methods to evaluate accuracy, inter-rater agreement, and feasibility. METHODS: Movement of the diaphragm was evaluated by ultrasonography in 19 healthy subjects and correlated with simultaneously performed spirometry. Two existing methods, the M-mode excursion at the posterior part of diaphragm and the B-mode at the top of the diaphragm, were compared with the Area method. Two independent raters reviewed film clips to analyze inter-rater agreement. Feasibility was tested by novice ultrasound operators. RESULTS: Correlation with expired lung volume was higher with the Area method, 0.88 (95% CI 0.81–0.95), p < 0.001, and with the M-mode measurement, 0.84 (95% CI 0.75–0.92), p < 0.001, than with the B-mode measurement, 0.71 (95% CI 0.59–0.83), p < 0.001. Inter-rater agreement was highest with the Area method, 0.9, p < 0.001, and M-mode measurement 0.9, p < 0.001, and lower with the B-mode measurement, 0.8, p < 0.001. The M-mode measurement could be done in only 20% at the left side. The Area method could be performed in all participants at both hemidiaphragms, and novice operators found it easy to perform. CONCLUSION: A new method to evaluate diaphragm movement is introduced. Accuracy and inter-rater agreement are high. The Area method is equally feasible at both hemidiaphragms in contrast to existing methods. However, additional studies should include more participants, different types of pulmonary diseases, and investigate the role of patient position to validate the Area method fully. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13089-018-0092-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6019663
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Springer Milan
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60196632018-07-13 The Area method: a new method for ultrasound assessment of diaphragmatic movement Skaarup, Søren Helbo Løkke, Anders Laursen, Christian B. Crit Ultrasound J Original Article BACKGROUND: Ultrasound can be used to assess diaphragm movement. Existing methods focus on movement at a single point at the hemidiaphragm and may not consider the anatomic and functional complexity. We aimed to develop an ultrasound method, the Area method, to assess movement of the entire hemidiaphragm dome and to compare it with existing methods to evaluate accuracy, inter-rater agreement, and feasibility. METHODS: Movement of the diaphragm was evaluated by ultrasonography in 19 healthy subjects and correlated with simultaneously performed spirometry. Two existing methods, the M-mode excursion at the posterior part of diaphragm and the B-mode at the top of the diaphragm, were compared with the Area method. Two independent raters reviewed film clips to analyze inter-rater agreement. Feasibility was tested by novice ultrasound operators. RESULTS: Correlation with expired lung volume was higher with the Area method, 0.88 (95% CI 0.81–0.95), p < 0.001, and with the M-mode measurement, 0.84 (95% CI 0.75–0.92), p < 0.001, than with the B-mode measurement, 0.71 (95% CI 0.59–0.83), p < 0.001. Inter-rater agreement was highest with the Area method, 0.9, p < 0.001, and M-mode measurement 0.9, p < 0.001, and lower with the B-mode measurement, 0.8, p < 0.001. The M-mode measurement could be done in only 20% at the left side. The Area method could be performed in all participants at both hemidiaphragms, and novice operators found it easy to perform. CONCLUSION: A new method to evaluate diaphragm movement is introduced. Accuracy and inter-rater agreement are high. The Area method is equally feasible at both hemidiaphragms in contrast to existing methods. However, additional studies should include more participants, different types of pulmonary diseases, and investigate the role of patient position to validate the Area method fully. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13089-018-0092-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Milan 2018-06-27 /pmc/articles/PMC6019663/ /pubmed/29946769 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13089-018-0092-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Article
Skaarup, Søren Helbo
Løkke, Anders
Laursen, Christian B.
The Area method: a new method for ultrasound assessment of diaphragmatic movement
title The Area method: a new method for ultrasound assessment of diaphragmatic movement
title_full The Area method: a new method for ultrasound assessment of diaphragmatic movement
title_fullStr The Area method: a new method for ultrasound assessment of diaphragmatic movement
title_full_unstemmed The Area method: a new method for ultrasound assessment of diaphragmatic movement
title_short The Area method: a new method for ultrasound assessment of diaphragmatic movement
title_sort area method: a new method for ultrasound assessment of diaphragmatic movement
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6019663/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29946769
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13089-018-0092-5
work_keys_str_mv AT skaarupsørenhelbo theareamethodanewmethodforultrasoundassessmentofdiaphragmaticmovement
AT løkkeanders theareamethodanewmethodforultrasoundassessmentofdiaphragmaticmovement
AT laursenchristianb theareamethodanewmethodforultrasoundassessmentofdiaphragmaticmovement
AT skaarupsørenhelbo areamethodanewmethodforultrasoundassessmentofdiaphragmaticmovement
AT løkkeanders areamethodanewmethodforultrasoundassessmentofdiaphragmaticmovement
AT laursenchristianb areamethodanewmethodforultrasoundassessmentofdiaphragmaticmovement