Can Different Expertise Levels of Ultrasound Operators Accurately Screen with Handheld Ultrasound?

ADVANCED ULTRASOUND IN DIAGNOSIS AND THERAPY >

2024 , Vol. 8 >Issue 3: 116 - 123

DOI: https://doi.org/10.37015/AUDT.2023.230046

Original Research

Can Different Expertise Levels of Ultrasound Operators Accurately Screen with Handheld Ultrasound?

Yuzhou Shen, MD ,
Lin Jin, MD ,
Lei Sha, MD ,
Mengmeng Cao, MD ,
Desheng Sun, MD ,
Li Liu, MD ,
Zhaojun Li, MD

Expand

^aDepartment of Ultrasound, Peking University Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China
^bDepartment of Ultrasound, Guanghua Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China
^cDepartment of Ultrasound, Shanghai General Hospital Jiading Branch, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
^dDepartment of Ultrasound, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China

First author contact:

¹Yuzhou Shen and Lin Jin contributed equally to this work.

Department of Ultrasound, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, 100 Haining Road, Hongkou District, Shanghai 200080, China. e-mail: lzj_1975@sina.com(LZJ);
Department of Ultrasound, Peking University Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China e-mail: liuli126126@126.com(LL)

Received date: 2023-09-16

Revised date: 2023-11-28

Accepted date: 2023-12-12

Online published: 2024-10-16

Fold

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate accuracy and feasibility of a handheld ultrasound machine for measuring carotid artery intima-media thicknesses (CIMT) and hemodynamic parameters by different expertise levels of ultrasound operators.

Methods: The operators were divided into three groups based on the level of their medical expertise: ultrasound technician, sonographer, and nursing staff. Operators from each group measured the CIMT and hemodynamic parameters of 25 volunteers using both handheld ultrasound and a conventional ultrasound machine. The reliability and reproducibility of handheld ultrasound measurements of CIMT and hemodynamic parameters (peak systolic velocity (PSV), end-diastolic velocity (EDV)) in operators were analyzed.

Results: After a period of training, there was no statistically significant difference between the mean CIMT measured using handheld ultrasound among the three operators (0.45 ± 0.09 mm, 0.50 ± 0.07 mm, 0.46 ± 0.08 mm, P> 0.05, respectively), as well as PSV (83.30 ± 15.42 cm/s, 76.28 ± 13.26 cm/s, 81.12 ± 21.21 cm/s, P> 0.05, respectively) and EDV (21.04 ± 4.12 cm/s, 21.87 ± 5.05 cm/s, 20.17 ± 5.90 cm/s, respectively, P> 0.05). Furthermore, there was a good repeatability and consistent of handheld ultrasound device in measuring mean CIMT in the ultrasound technician and sonographer groups (r = 0.662, 0.691, respectively, P < 0.01).

Conclusions: Under the premise of proper training, handheld ultrasound systems are feasible for rapid and primary assessment of carotid artery by operators with different levels of expertise.

Key words： Handheld ultrasound; Conventional ultrasound; Carotid artery; Intima-media

Cite this article

Yuzhou Shen, MD , Lin Jin, MD , Lei Sha, MD , Mengmeng Cao, MD , Desheng Sun, MD , Li Liu, MD , Zhaojun Li, MD . Can Different Expertise Levels of Ultrasound Operators Accurately Screen with Handheld Ultrasound?[J]. ADVANCED ULTRASOUND IN DIAGNOSIS AND THERAPY, 2024 , 8(3) : 116 -123 . DOI: 10.37015/AUDT.2023.230046

References

[1]	Wiley BM, Borlaug BA, Kane GC. Lung ultrasound in heart failure: envisioning handheld ultrasound to empower nurses and transform health care. J Am Coll Cardiol 2022;80:524-526.
[2]	Jung EM, Dinkel J, Verloh N, Brandenstein M, Stroszczynski C, Jung F, et al. Wireless point-of-care ultrasound: First experiences with a new generation handheld device. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 2021;79:463-474.
[3]	Wang YT, Chai HH, Ye RZ, Li JZ, Liu JB, Lin C, et al. Point-of-care ultrasound: new concepts and future trends. Advanced ultrasound in diagnosis and therapy 2021;5:268-276.
[4]	Liu JY, Xu JJ, Forsberg F, Liu JB. CMUT/CMOS-based Butterfly iQ - A Portable Personal Sonoscope. Advanced ultrasound in diagnosis and therapy 2019;3:115-118.
[5]	Barnett HJM, Taylor DW, Haynes RB, Sackett DL, Peerless SJ, Ferguson GG, et al. Beneficial effect of carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients with high-grade carotid stenosis. N Engl J Med 1991;325:445-453.
[6]	Arnett DK, Blumenthal RS, Albert MA, Buroker AB, Goldberger ZD, Hahn EJ, et al. 2019 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2019;140:e596-e646.
[7]	Eigenbrodt ML, Evans GW, Rose KM, Bursac Z, Tracy RE, Mehta JL, et al. Bilateral common carotid artery ultrasound for prediction of incident strokes using intima-media thickness and external diameter: an observational study. Cardiovasc Ultrasound 2013;11:22.
[8]	Hermann DM, Gronewold J, Lehmann N, Seidel UK, M?hlenkamp S, Weimar C, et al. Intima-media thickness predicts stroke risk in the Heinz Nixdorf Recall study in association with vascular risk factors, age and gender. Atherosclerosis 2012;224:84-89.
[9]	Jin L, Tong LY, Sha L, Cao MM, Shen CQ, Du LF, et al. Handheld versus conventional ultrasound for assessing carotid artery in routine volunteers. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 2022;82:255-263.
[10]	Davies KN, Humphrey PR. Complications of cerebral angiography in patients with symptomatic carotid territory ischaemia screened by carotid ultrasound. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1993;56: 967-972.
[11]	Elgersma OE, Buijs PC, Wüst AF, van der Graaf Y, Eikelboom BC, Mali WP. Maximum internal carotid arterial stenosis: assessment with rotational angiography versus conventional intraarterial digital subtraction angiography. Radiology 1999;213:777-783.
[12]	Weber J, Veith P, Jung B, Ihorst G, Moske-Eick O, Meckel S, et al. MR angiography at 3 Tesla to assess proximal internal carotid artery stenoses: contrast-enhanced or 3D time-of-flight MR angiography? Clin Neuroradiol 2015;25:41-48.
[13]	Alexandrov AV, Needleman L. Carotid artery stenosis: making complex assessments of a simple problem or simplifying approach to a complex disease? Stroke 2012;43:627-628.
[14]	Bennett D, De Vita E, Mezzasalma F, Lanzarone N, Cameli P, Bianchi F, et al. Portable Pocket-Sized Ultrasound Scanner for the Evaluation of Lung Involvement in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients. Ultrasound Med Biol 2021;47:19-24.
[15]	Chetioui A, Masia T, Claret PG, Markarian T, Muller L, Lefrant JY, et al. Pocket-sized ultrasound device for internal jugular puncture: A randomized study of performance on a simulation model. J Vasc Access. 2019;20:404-408.
[16]	Sforza A, Mancusi C, Carlino MV, Buonauro A, Barozzi M, Romano G, et al. Diagnostic performance of multi-organ ultrasound with pocket-sized device in the management of acute dyspnea. Cardiovasc Ultrasound 2017;15:16.
[17]	Platz E, Pivetta E, Merz AA, Peck J, Rivero J, Cheng S. Impact of device selection and clip duration on lung ultrasound assessment in patients with heart failure. Am J Emerg Med 2015;33:1552-1556.
[18]	Mancusi C, Carlino MV, Sforza A. Point-of-care ultrasound with pocket-size devices in emergency department. Echocardiography 2019;36:1755-1764.
[19]	Jang AY RJ, Oh PC, Moon J, Chung WJ. Feasibility and applicability of wireless handheld ultrasound measurement of carotid intimamedia thickness in patients with cardiac symptoms. Yonsei Med J 2020;61: 129-136.
[20]	Kim DH, Shin S, Kim N, Choi T, Choi SH, Choi YS. Carotid ultrasound measurements for assessing fluid responsiveness in spontaneously breathing patients: corrected flow time and respirophasic variation in blood flow peak velocity. Br J Anaesth. 2018;121:541-549.
[21]	Corriveau MM, Johnston KW. Interobserver variability of carotid Doppler peak velocity measurements among technologists in an ICAVL-accredited vascular laboratory. J Vasc Surg 2004;39:735-741.
[22]	Gill RW. Measurement of blood flow by ultrasound: accuracy and sources of error. Ultrasound Med Biol 1985;11:625-641.
[23]	Eicke BM, Kremkau FW, Hinson H, Tegeler CH. Peak velocity overestimation and linear-array spectral Doppler. J Neuroimaging 1995;5:115-121.

Options

Outlines

/

〈

〉