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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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.
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