David Halata, Dusan Zhor, Roman Skulec, Bohumil Seifert
{"title":"全科医生在初级保健中进行的即时超声检查肺的准确性:一项横断面研究。","authors":"David Halata, Dusan Zhor, Roman Skulec, Bohumil Seifert","doi":"10.1186/s12875-025-02802-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Lung ultrasonography (LUS) is a point-of-care imaging modality with growing potential in primary care.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>While its use is well established in hospital settings, data on its accuracy when performed by general practitioners (GPs) remain limited. This study aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of LUS conducted by GPs following structured training.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We recruited 17 GPs from various regions of the Czech Republic. They completed a two-day educational course focused on LUS. Patients with current dyspnoea (NYHA II-IV) or a history of dyspnoea within the last four weeks were included and underwent LUS to assess the presence of pleural effusion and interstitial syndrome. An independent expert sonographer, blinded to clinical data, evaluated recorded LUS video loops as the reference standard. LUS findings were categorized into A profile (presence of A lines and intact lung sliding, indicating normal aeration), B profile (three or more B lines per intercostal space in at least two intercostal spaces per hemithorax, suggesting interstitial syndrome), pulmonary consolidation and pleural effusion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 128 patients were enrolled in the study. A total of 768 thoracic segments were examined. A profile was identified in 642 (83.6%) segments, B profile in 108 (14.1%), pulmonary consolidation in 8 (1.0%), and pleural effusion in 12 (1.6%). For the identification of A profile, the sensitivity was 97.51% (95% CI 95.98-98.57), and the specificity was 88.10% (95% CI 81,13-93,18); for B profile, the sensitivity was 87.04% (95% CI 79,21-92,73), and the specificity was 97.73% (95% CI96,28-98,72); for pulmonary consolidation, the sensitivity was 100.0% (95% CI 63,06-100,00), and the specificity was 100.0% (95% CI 99,52-100,0); for pleural effusion, the sensitivity was 83.33% (95% CI 51,59-97,91), and the specificity was 99.87% (95% CI 99,27-100,00).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings provide important preliminary data, demonstrating that GPs can perform LUS accurately after a structured training program. THE TRIAL REGISTRATION IDENTIFIER: is NCT04905719.</p>","PeriodicalId":72428,"journal":{"name":"BMC primary care","volume":"26 1","pages":"99"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accuracy of point-of-care ultrasound examination of the lung in primary care performed by general practitioners: a cross-sectional study.\",\"authors\":\"David Halata, Dusan Zhor, Roman Skulec, Bohumil Seifert\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12875-025-02802-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Lung ultrasonography (LUS) is a point-of-care imaging modality with growing potential in primary care.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>While its use is well established in hospital settings, data on its accuracy when performed by general practitioners (GPs) remain limited. This study aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of LUS conducted by GPs following structured training.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We recruited 17 GPs from various regions of the Czech Republic. They completed a two-day educational course focused on LUS. Patients with current dyspnoea (NYHA II-IV) or a history of dyspnoea within the last four weeks were included and underwent LUS to assess the presence of pleural effusion and interstitial syndrome. An independent expert sonographer, blinded to clinical data, evaluated recorded LUS video loops as the reference standard. LUS findings were categorized into A profile (presence of A lines and intact lung sliding, indicating normal aeration), B profile (three or more B lines per intercostal space in at least two intercostal spaces per hemithorax, suggesting interstitial syndrome), pulmonary consolidation and pleural effusion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 128 patients were enrolled in the study. A total of 768 thoracic segments were examined. A profile was identified in 642 (83.6%) segments, B profile in 108 (14.1%), pulmonary consolidation in 8 (1.0%), and pleural effusion in 12 (1.6%). For the identification of A profile, the sensitivity was 97.51% (95% CI 95.98-98.57), and the specificity was 88.10% (95% CI 81,13-93,18); for B profile, the sensitivity was 87.04% (95% CI 79,21-92,73), and the specificity was 97.73% (95% CI96,28-98,72); for pulmonary consolidation, the sensitivity was 100.0% (95% CI 63,06-100,00), and the specificity was 100.0% (95% CI 99,52-100,0); for pleural effusion, the sensitivity was 83.33% (95% CI 51,59-97,91), and the specificity was 99.87% (95% CI 99,27-100,00).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings provide important preliminary data, demonstrating that GPs can perform LUS accurately after a structured training program. THE TRIAL REGISTRATION IDENTIFIER: is NCT04905719.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72428,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC primary care\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"99\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC primary care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-025-02802-4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC primary care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-025-02802-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:肺超声检查(LUS)是一种在初级保健中具有越来越大潜力的即时成像方式。目的:虽然它的使用在医院环境中得到了很好的确立,但由全科医生(gp)执行时其准确性的数据仍然有限。本研究旨在评估全科医生在接受结构化培训后对LUS的诊断准确性。方法:我们从捷克共和国不同地区招募了17名全科医生。他们完成了为期两天的以LUS为重点的教育课程。纳入当前呼吸困难(NYHA II-IV)或过去四周内有呼吸困难史的患者,并进行LUS以评估胸膜积液和间质综合征的存在。一个独立的专家超声医师,不知道临床数据,评估记录的LUS视频循环作为参考标准。LUS表现分为A型(存在A线和完整的肺滑动,表明通气正常),B型(每个半胸至少两个肋间隙中每个肋间隙有三个或更多B线,提示间质综合征),肺实变和胸腔积液。结果:共有128例患者入组研究。共检查了768个胸段。A型642例(83.6%),B型108例(14.1%),肺实变8例(1.0%),胸腔积液12例(1.6%)。对于A型基因的鉴别,敏感性为97.51% (95% CI 95.98 ~ 98.57),特异性为88.10% (95% CI 81、13 ~ 93,18);B型的敏感性为87.04% (95% CI为79,21-92,73),特异性为97.73% (95% CI为96,28-98,72);对于肺实变,敏感性为100.0% (95% CI 63,06- 100,000),特异性为100.0% (95% CI 99,52-100,0);胸膜积液的敏感性为83.33% (95% CI 51,59 ~ 97,91),特异性为99.87% (95% CI 99,27 ~ 10万)。结论:我们的研究结果提供了重要的初步数据,表明全科医生可以在结构化的培训计划后准确地执行LUS。试验注册标识符:NCT04905719。
Accuracy of point-of-care ultrasound examination of the lung in primary care performed by general practitioners: a cross-sectional study.
Background: Lung ultrasonography (LUS) is a point-of-care imaging modality with growing potential in primary care.
Objectives: While its use is well established in hospital settings, data on its accuracy when performed by general practitioners (GPs) remain limited. This study aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of LUS conducted by GPs following structured training.
Methods: We recruited 17 GPs from various regions of the Czech Republic. They completed a two-day educational course focused on LUS. Patients with current dyspnoea (NYHA II-IV) or a history of dyspnoea within the last four weeks were included and underwent LUS to assess the presence of pleural effusion and interstitial syndrome. An independent expert sonographer, blinded to clinical data, evaluated recorded LUS video loops as the reference standard. LUS findings were categorized into A profile (presence of A lines and intact lung sliding, indicating normal aeration), B profile (three or more B lines per intercostal space in at least two intercostal spaces per hemithorax, suggesting interstitial syndrome), pulmonary consolidation and pleural effusion.
Results: A total of 128 patients were enrolled in the study. A total of 768 thoracic segments were examined. A profile was identified in 642 (83.6%) segments, B profile in 108 (14.1%), pulmonary consolidation in 8 (1.0%), and pleural effusion in 12 (1.6%). For the identification of A profile, the sensitivity was 97.51% (95% CI 95.98-98.57), and the specificity was 88.10% (95% CI 81,13-93,18); for B profile, the sensitivity was 87.04% (95% CI 79,21-92,73), and the specificity was 97.73% (95% CI96,28-98,72); for pulmonary consolidation, the sensitivity was 100.0% (95% CI 63,06-100,00), and the specificity was 100.0% (95% CI 99,52-100,0); for pleural effusion, the sensitivity was 83.33% (95% CI 51,59-97,91), and the specificity was 99.87% (95% CI 99,27-100,00).
Conclusion: Our findings provide important preliminary data, demonstrating that GPs can perform LUS accurately after a structured training program. THE TRIAL REGISTRATION IDENTIFIER: is NCT04905719.