Cargando…

A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of ultrasound in emergency care settings

BACKGROUND: The use of ultrasound (US) in emergency departments (ED) has become widespread. This includes both traditional US scans performed by radiology departments as well as point-of-care US (POCUS) performed by bedside clinicians. There has been significant interest in better understanding the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lentz, Brian, Fong, Tiffany, Rhyne, Randall, Risko, Nicholas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7943664/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33687607
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13089-021-00216-8
_version_ 1783662541022429184
author Lentz, Brian
Fong, Tiffany
Rhyne, Randall
Risko, Nicholas
author_facet Lentz, Brian
Fong, Tiffany
Rhyne, Randall
Risko, Nicholas
author_sort Lentz, Brian
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The use of ultrasound (US) in emergency departments (ED) has become widespread. This includes both traditional US scans performed by radiology departments as well as point-of-care US (POCUS) performed by bedside clinicians. There has been significant interest in better understanding the appropriate use of imaging and where opportunities to enhance cost-effectiveness may exist. The purpose of this systematic review is to identify published evidence surrounding the cost-effectiveness of US in the ED and to grade the quality of that evidence. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies were considered for inclusion if they were: (1) economic evaluations, (2) studied the clinical use of ultrasound, and (3) took place in an emergency care setting. Included studies were critically appraised using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist. RESULTS: We identified 631 potentially relevant articles. Of these, 35 studies met all inclusion criteria and were eligible for data abstraction. In general, studies were supportive of the use of US. In particular, 11 studies formed a strong consensus that US enhanced cost-effectiveness in the investigation of pediatric appendicitis and 6 studies supported enhancements in the evaluation of abdominal trauma. Across the studies, weaknesses in methodology and reporting were common, such as lack of sensitivity analyses and inconsistent reporting of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. CONCLUSIONS: The body of existing evidence, though limited, generally demonstrates that the inclusion of US in emergency care settings allows for more cost-effective care. The most definitive evidence for improvements in cost-effectiveness surround the evaluation of pediatric appendicitis, followed by the evaluation of abdominal trauma. POCUS outside of trauma has had mixed results.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7943664
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79436642021-03-28 A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of ultrasound in emergency care settings Lentz, Brian Fong, Tiffany Rhyne, Randall Risko, Nicholas Ultrasound J Review BACKGROUND: The use of ultrasound (US) in emergency departments (ED) has become widespread. This includes both traditional US scans performed by radiology departments as well as point-of-care US (POCUS) performed by bedside clinicians. There has been significant interest in better understanding the appropriate use of imaging and where opportunities to enhance cost-effectiveness may exist. The purpose of this systematic review is to identify published evidence surrounding the cost-effectiveness of US in the ED and to grade the quality of that evidence. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies were considered for inclusion if they were: (1) economic evaluations, (2) studied the clinical use of ultrasound, and (3) took place in an emergency care setting. Included studies were critically appraised using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist. RESULTS: We identified 631 potentially relevant articles. Of these, 35 studies met all inclusion criteria and were eligible for data abstraction. In general, studies were supportive of the use of US. In particular, 11 studies formed a strong consensus that US enhanced cost-effectiveness in the investigation of pediatric appendicitis and 6 studies supported enhancements in the evaluation of abdominal trauma. Across the studies, weaknesses in methodology and reporting were common, such as lack of sensitivity analyses and inconsistent reporting of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. CONCLUSIONS: The body of existing evidence, though limited, generally demonstrates that the inclusion of US in emergency care settings allows for more cost-effective care. The most definitive evidence for improvements in cost-effectiveness surround the evaluation of pediatric appendicitis, followed by the evaluation of abdominal trauma. POCUS outside of trauma has had mixed results. Springer International Publishing 2021-03-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7943664/ /pubmed/33687607 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13089-021-00216-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Review
Lentz, Brian
Fong, Tiffany
Rhyne, Randall
Risko, Nicholas
A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of ultrasound in emergency care settings
title A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of ultrasound in emergency care settings
title_full A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of ultrasound in emergency care settings
title_fullStr A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of ultrasound in emergency care settings
title_full_unstemmed A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of ultrasound in emergency care settings
title_short A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of ultrasound in emergency care settings
title_sort systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of ultrasound in emergency care settings
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7943664/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33687607
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13089-021-00216-8
work_keys_str_mv AT lentzbrian asystematicreviewofthecosteffectivenessofultrasoundinemergencycaresettings
AT fongtiffany asystematicreviewofthecosteffectivenessofultrasoundinemergencycaresettings
AT rhynerandall asystematicreviewofthecosteffectivenessofultrasoundinemergencycaresettings
AT riskonicholas asystematicreviewofthecosteffectivenessofultrasoundinemergencycaresettings
AT lentzbrian systematicreviewofthecosteffectivenessofultrasoundinemergencycaresettings
AT fongtiffany systematicreviewofthecosteffectivenessofultrasoundinemergencycaresettings
AT rhynerandall systematicreviewofthecosteffectivenessofultrasoundinemergencycaresettings
AT riskonicholas systematicreviewofthecosteffectivenessofultrasoundinemergencycaresettings