We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
A majority of rural emergency departments in the province of Quebec use point-of-care ultrasound: a cross-sectional survey.
BMC Emergency Medicine 2015 December 12
BACKGROUND: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) can be used to provide rapid answers to specific and potentially life-threatening clinical questions, and to improve the safety of procedures. The rate of POCUS access and use in Canada is unclear. The objective of this study was to examine access to POCUS and potential barriers/facilitators to its use among rural physicians in Quebec.
METHODS: This descriptive cross-sectional study used an online survey. The 30-item questionnaire is an adapted and translated version of a questionnaire used in a prior survey conducted in rural Ontario, Canada. The questionnaire was pre-tested for clarity and relevance. The survey was sent to non-locum physicians working either full- or part-time in rural emergency departments (EDs) (n = 206). All EDs were located in rural and small towns and provided 24/7 medical coverage with acute care hospitalization beds.
RESULTS: In total, 108 surveys were completed (participation rate = 52.4%). Of the individuals who completed surveys, ninety-three percent were family physicians, and seven percent had Canadian College of Family Physicians - Emergency Medicine (CCFP-EM) certification. The median number of years of practice was seven. A bedside ultrasound device was available in 95% of rural EDs; 75.9% of physicians reported using POCUS on a regular basis. The most common indications for POCUS use were to rule out abdominal aortic aneurysm (70.4%) and to evaluate presence of free fluid in trauma and intrauterine pregnancy (60%). The most common reason (73%) for not using POCUS was limited access to POCUS training programs. Over 40% of POCUS users received training in POCUS during medical school or residency. Sixty-four percent received training from the Canadian Emergency Ultrasound Society, 13% received training from the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians, and 23% were trained in another course. Finally, 95% of respondents reported that POCUS skills are essential for rural ED practice.
CONCLUSIONS: POCUS use in rural EDs in the province of Quebec appears to be relatively widespread. Access to training programs is a barrier to greater use.
METHODS: This descriptive cross-sectional study used an online survey. The 30-item questionnaire is an adapted and translated version of a questionnaire used in a prior survey conducted in rural Ontario, Canada. The questionnaire was pre-tested for clarity and relevance. The survey was sent to non-locum physicians working either full- or part-time in rural emergency departments (EDs) (n = 206). All EDs were located in rural and small towns and provided 24/7 medical coverage with acute care hospitalization beds.
RESULTS: In total, 108 surveys were completed (participation rate = 52.4%). Of the individuals who completed surveys, ninety-three percent were family physicians, and seven percent had Canadian College of Family Physicians - Emergency Medicine (CCFP-EM) certification. The median number of years of practice was seven. A bedside ultrasound device was available in 95% of rural EDs; 75.9% of physicians reported using POCUS on a regular basis. The most common indications for POCUS use were to rule out abdominal aortic aneurysm (70.4%) and to evaluate presence of free fluid in trauma and intrauterine pregnancy (60%). The most common reason (73%) for not using POCUS was limited access to POCUS training programs. Over 40% of POCUS users received training in POCUS during medical school or residency. Sixty-four percent received training from the Canadian Emergency Ultrasound Society, 13% received training from the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians, and 23% were trained in another course. Finally, 95% of respondents reported that POCUS skills are essential for rural ED practice.
CONCLUSIONS: POCUS use in rural EDs in the province of Quebec appears to be relatively widespread. Access to training programs is a barrier to greater use.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app