Cargando…
Comparing accuracy of bedside ultrasound examination with physical examination for detection of pleural effusion
BACKGROUND: In detecting pleural effusion, bedside ultrasound (US) has been shown to be more accurate than auscultation. However, US has not been previously compared to the comprehensive physical examination. This study seeks to compare the accuracy of physical examination with bedside US in detecti...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8421481/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34487258 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13089-021-00241-7 |
_version_ | 1783749091233103872 |
---|---|
author | Walsh, Michael H. Zhang, Kang X. Cox, Emily J. Chen, Justin M. Cowley, Nicholas G. Oleynick, Christopher J. Smyth, Leo M. Ma, Irene W. Y. |
author_facet | Walsh, Michael H. Zhang, Kang X. Cox, Emily J. Chen, Justin M. Cowley, Nicholas G. Oleynick, Christopher J. Smyth, Leo M. Ma, Irene W. Y. |
author_sort | Walsh, Michael H. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In detecting pleural effusion, bedside ultrasound (US) has been shown to be more accurate than auscultation. However, US has not been previously compared to the comprehensive physical examination. This study seeks to compare the accuracy of physical examination with bedside US in detecting pleural effusion. METHODS: This study included a convenience sample of 34 medical inpatients from Calgary, Canada and Spokane, USA, with chest imaging performed within 24 h of recruitment. Imaging results served as the reference standard for pleural effusion. All patients underwent a comprehensive lung physical examination and a bedside US examination by two researchers blinded to the imaging results. RESULTS: Physical examination was less accurate than US (sensitivity of 44.0% [95% confidence interval (CI) 30.0–58.8%], specificity 88.9% (95% CI 65.3–98.6%), positive likelihood (LR) 3.96 (95% CI 1.03–15.18), negative LR 0.63 (95% CI 0.47–0.85) for physical examination; sensitivity 98% (95% CI 89.4–100%), specificity 94.4% (95% CI 72.7–99.9%), positive LR 17.6 (95% CI 2.6–118.6), negative LR 0.02 (95% CI 0.00–0.15) for US). The percentage of examinations rated with a confidence level of 4 or higher (out of 5) was higher for US (85% of the seated US examination and 94% of the supine US examination, compared to 35% of the PE, P < 0.001), and took less time to perform (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: US examination for pleural effusion was more accurate than the physical examination, conferred higher confidence, and required less time to complete. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8421481 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84214812021-09-22 Comparing accuracy of bedside ultrasound examination with physical examination for detection of pleural effusion Walsh, Michael H. Zhang, Kang X. Cox, Emily J. Chen, Justin M. Cowley, Nicholas G. Oleynick, Christopher J. Smyth, Leo M. Ma, Irene W. Y. Ultrasound J Original Article BACKGROUND: In detecting pleural effusion, bedside ultrasound (US) has been shown to be more accurate than auscultation. However, US has not been previously compared to the comprehensive physical examination. This study seeks to compare the accuracy of physical examination with bedside US in detecting pleural effusion. METHODS: This study included a convenience sample of 34 medical inpatients from Calgary, Canada and Spokane, USA, with chest imaging performed within 24 h of recruitment. Imaging results served as the reference standard for pleural effusion. All patients underwent a comprehensive lung physical examination and a bedside US examination by two researchers blinded to the imaging results. RESULTS: Physical examination was less accurate than US (sensitivity of 44.0% [95% confidence interval (CI) 30.0–58.8%], specificity 88.9% (95% CI 65.3–98.6%), positive likelihood (LR) 3.96 (95% CI 1.03–15.18), negative LR 0.63 (95% CI 0.47–0.85) for physical examination; sensitivity 98% (95% CI 89.4–100%), specificity 94.4% (95% CI 72.7–99.9%), positive LR 17.6 (95% CI 2.6–118.6), negative LR 0.02 (95% CI 0.00–0.15) for US). The percentage of examinations rated with a confidence level of 4 or higher (out of 5) was higher for US (85% of the seated US examination and 94% of the supine US examination, compared to 35% of the PE, P < 0.001), and took less time to perform (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: US examination for pleural effusion was more accurate than the physical examination, conferred higher confidence, and required less time to complete. Springer International Publishing 2021-09-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8421481/ /pubmed/34487258 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13089-021-00241-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/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/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article Walsh, Michael H. Zhang, Kang X. Cox, Emily J. Chen, Justin M. Cowley, Nicholas G. Oleynick, Christopher J. Smyth, Leo M. Ma, Irene W. Y. Comparing accuracy of bedside ultrasound examination with physical examination for detection of pleural effusion |
title | Comparing accuracy of bedside ultrasound examination with physical examination for detection of pleural effusion |
title_full | Comparing accuracy of bedside ultrasound examination with physical examination for detection of pleural effusion |
title_fullStr | Comparing accuracy of bedside ultrasound examination with physical examination for detection of pleural effusion |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparing accuracy of bedside ultrasound examination with physical examination for detection of pleural effusion |
title_short | Comparing accuracy of bedside ultrasound examination with physical examination for detection of pleural effusion |
title_sort | comparing accuracy of bedside ultrasound examination with physical examination for detection of pleural effusion |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8421481/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34487258 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13089-021-00241-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT walshmichaelh comparingaccuracyofbedsideultrasoundexaminationwithphysicalexaminationfordetectionofpleuraleffusion AT zhangkangx comparingaccuracyofbedsideultrasoundexaminationwithphysicalexaminationfordetectionofpleuraleffusion AT coxemilyj comparingaccuracyofbedsideultrasoundexaminationwithphysicalexaminationfordetectionofpleuraleffusion AT chenjustinm comparingaccuracyofbedsideultrasoundexaminationwithphysicalexaminationfordetectionofpleuraleffusion AT cowleynicholasg comparingaccuracyofbedsideultrasoundexaminationwithphysicalexaminationfordetectionofpleuraleffusion AT oleynickchristopherj comparingaccuracyofbedsideultrasoundexaminationwithphysicalexaminationfordetectionofpleuraleffusion AT smythleom comparingaccuracyofbedsideultrasoundexaminationwithphysicalexaminationfordetectionofpleuraleffusion AT mairenewy comparingaccuracyofbedsideultrasoundexaminationwithphysicalexaminationfordetectionofpleuraleffusion |