Cargando…
Comparison of four handheld point-of-care ultrasound devices by expert users
BACKGROUND: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is rapidly becoming ubiquitous across healthcare specialties. This is due to several factors including its portability, immediacy of results to guide clinical decision-making, and lack of radiation exposure to patients. The recent growth of handheld ultra...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9263020/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35796842 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13089-022-00274-6 |
_version_ | 1784742630987399168 |
---|---|
author | Le, Minh-Phuong T. Voigt, Lara Nathanson, Robert Maw, Anna M. Johnson, Gordon Dancel, Ria Mathews, Benji Moreira, Alvaro Sauthoff, Harald Gelabert, Christopher Kurian, Linda M. Dumovich, Jenna Proud, Kevin C. Solis-McCarthy, Jessica Candotti, Carolina Dayton, Christopher Arena, Alexander Boesch, Brandon Flores, Saul Foster, Mark T. Villalobos, Nicholas Wong, Tanping Ortiz-Jaimes, Gabriel Mader, Michael Sisson, Craig Soni, Nilam J. |
author_facet | Le, Minh-Phuong T. Voigt, Lara Nathanson, Robert Maw, Anna M. Johnson, Gordon Dancel, Ria Mathews, Benji Moreira, Alvaro Sauthoff, Harald Gelabert, Christopher Kurian, Linda M. Dumovich, Jenna Proud, Kevin C. Solis-McCarthy, Jessica Candotti, Carolina Dayton, Christopher Arena, Alexander Boesch, Brandon Flores, Saul Foster, Mark T. Villalobos, Nicholas Wong, Tanping Ortiz-Jaimes, Gabriel Mader, Michael Sisson, Craig Soni, Nilam J. |
author_sort | Le, Minh-Phuong T. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is rapidly becoming ubiquitous across healthcare specialties. This is due to several factors including its portability, immediacy of results to guide clinical decision-making, and lack of radiation exposure to patients. The recent growth of handheld ultrasound devices has improved access to ultrasound for many clinicians. Few studies have directly compared different handheld ultrasound devices among themselves or to cart-based ultrasound machines. We conducted a prospective observational study comparing four common handheld ultrasound devices for ease of use, image quality, and overall satisfaction. Twenty-four POCUS experts utilized four handheld devices (Butterfly iQ+™ by Butterfly Network Inc., Kosmos™ by EchoNous, Vscan Air™ by General Electric, and Lumify™ by Philips Healthcare) to obtain three ultrasound views on the same standardized patients using high- and low-frequency probes. RESULTS: Data were collected from 24 POCUS experts using all 4 handheld devices. No single ultrasound device was superior in all categories. For overall ease of use, the Vscan Air™ was rated highest, followed by the Lumify™. For overall image quality, Lumify™ was rated highest, followed by Kosmos™. The Lumify™ device was rated highest for overall satisfaction, while the Vscan Air™ was rated as the most likely to be purchased personally and carried in one’s coat pocket. The top 5 characteristics of handheld ultrasound devices rated as being “very important” were image quality, ease of use, portability, total costs, and availability of different probes. CONCLUSIONS: In a comparison of four common handheld ultrasound devices in the United States, no single handheld ultrasound device was perceived to have all desired characteristics. POCUS experts rated the Lumify™ highest for image quality and Vscan Air™ highest for ease of use. Overall satisfaction was highest with the Lumify™ device, while the most likely to be purchased as a pocket device was the Vscan Air™. Image quality was felt to be the most important characteristic in evaluating handheld ultrasound devices. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13089-022-00274-6. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9263020 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92630202022-07-09 Comparison of four handheld point-of-care ultrasound devices by expert users Le, Minh-Phuong T. Voigt, Lara Nathanson, Robert Maw, Anna M. Johnson, Gordon Dancel, Ria Mathews, Benji Moreira, Alvaro Sauthoff, Harald Gelabert, Christopher Kurian, Linda M. Dumovich, Jenna Proud, Kevin C. Solis-McCarthy, Jessica Candotti, Carolina Dayton, Christopher Arena, Alexander Boesch, Brandon Flores, Saul Foster, Mark T. Villalobos, Nicholas Wong, Tanping Ortiz-Jaimes, Gabriel Mader, Michael Sisson, Craig Soni, Nilam J. Ultrasound J Original Article BACKGROUND: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is rapidly becoming ubiquitous across healthcare specialties. This is due to several factors including its portability, immediacy of results to guide clinical decision-making, and lack of radiation exposure to patients. The recent growth of handheld ultrasound devices has improved access to ultrasound for many clinicians. Few studies have directly compared different handheld ultrasound devices among themselves or to cart-based ultrasound machines. We conducted a prospective observational study comparing four common handheld ultrasound devices for ease of use, image quality, and overall satisfaction. Twenty-four POCUS experts utilized four handheld devices (Butterfly iQ+™ by Butterfly Network Inc., Kosmos™ by EchoNous, Vscan Air™ by General Electric, and Lumify™ by Philips Healthcare) to obtain three ultrasound views on the same standardized patients using high- and low-frequency probes. RESULTS: Data were collected from 24 POCUS experts using all 4 handheld devices. No single ultrasound device was superior in all categories. For overall ease of use, the Vscan Air™ was rated highest, followed by the Lumify™. For overall image quality, Lumify™ was rated highest, followed by Kosmos™. The Lumify™ device was rated highest for overall satisfaction, while the Vscan Air™ was rated as the most likely to be purchased personally and carried in one’s coat pocket. The top 5 characteristics of handheld ultrasound devices rated as being “very important” were image quality, ease of use, portability, total costs, and availability of different probes. CONCLUSIONS: In a comparison of four common handheld ultrasound devices in the United States, no single handheld ultrasound device was perceived to have all desired characteristics. POCUS experts rated the Lumify™ highest for image quality and Vscan Air™ highest for ease of use. Overall satisfaction was highest with the Lumify™ device, while the most likely to be purchased as a pocket device was the Vscan Air™. Image quality was felt to be the most important characteristic in evaluating handheld ultrasound devices. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13089-022-00274-6. Springer International Publishing 2022-07-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9263020/ /pubmed/35796842 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13089-022-00274-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 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 Le, Minh-Phuong T. Voigt, Lara Nathanson, Robert Maw, Anna M. Johnson, Gordon Dancel, Ria Mathews, Benji Moreira, Alvaro Sauthoff, Harald Gelabert, Christopher Kurian, Linda M. Dumovich, Jenna Proud, Kevin C. Solis-McCarthy, Jessica Candotti, Carolina Dayton, Christopher Arena, Alexander Boesch, Brandon Flores, Saul Foster, Mark T. Villalobos, Nicholas Wong, Tanping Ortiz-Jaimes, Gabriel Mader, Michael Sisson, Craig Soni, Nilam J. Comparison of four handheld point-of-care ultrasound devices by expert users |
title | Comparison of four handheld point-of-care ultrasound devices by expert users |
title_full | Comparison of four handheld point-of-care ultrasound devices by expert users |
title_fullStr | Comparison of four handheld point-of-care ultrasound devices by expert users |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of four handheld point-of-care ultrasound devices by expert users |
title_short | Comparison of four handheld point-of-care ultrasound devices by expert users |
title_sort | comparison of four handheld point-of-care ultrasound devices by expert users |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9263020/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35796842 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13089-022-00274-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT leminhphuongt comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT voigtlara comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT nathansonrobert comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT mawannam comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT johnsongordon comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT dancelria comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT mathewsbenji comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT moreiraalvaro comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT sauthoffharald comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT gelabertchristopher comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT kurianlindam comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT dumovichjenna comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT proudkevinc comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT solismccarthyjessica comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT candotticarolina comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT daytonchristopher comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT arenaalexander comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT boeschbrandon comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT floressaul comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT fostermarkt comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT villalobosnicholas comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT wongtanping comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT ortizjaimesgabriel comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT madermichael comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT sissoncraig comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers AT soninilamj comparisonoffourhandheldpointofcareultrasounddevicesbyexpertusers |