Author, date and country | Patient group | Study type (level of evidence) | Outcomes | Key results | Study Weaknesses |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Elizabeth Lalande, Chantal Guimont, Marcel Edmond, Marc Charles Parent, Claude Topping, Brice Lion 2016 Canada | Convenience sample of 96 total patients. -Adults, aged 18 and older, presenting to the emergency department after sustaining blunt thoracic t rauma and with clinical suspicion of rib fractures. -Exclusions: -greater than 96 hours post trauma -hemodynamic instability -GCS 14 or less -with other significant traumatic injury | Investigational study | 65% of EP concluded that PoCUS was a feasible option for diagnosing rib fractures with a VAS of 63. | PoCUS is a feasible option in the diagnosis of rib fractures in EP patients. | 1. Patients were included based on physician suspicion of rib fractures following blunt thoracic trauma. Thus, it seems patients were not randomized. This was a convenience sample. 2. Results were not compared to a gold standard — neither US or Xray are gold standard. CT thorax is gold standard, but results of US and Xray were not compared to CT results on patients included in the study. 3. US is operator dependent and the EPs included had no prior experience with US for diagnosis of rib fractures (they did have at least 9 years of US experience however). |
15% of PoCUS were limited by patient discomfort. | Patient discomfort was the largest limiting factor in PoCUS. | ||||
29% of patients were diagnosed with rib fractures by PoCUS, not seen on CXR. | PoCUS is able to detect rib fractures not seen by CXR. | ||||
11 of 65 patients had rib fractures diagnosed with CXR, not seen on PoCUS. | PoCUS is not 100% reliable in detection of rib fractures. |