Premium
Handheld Ultrasound
Author(s) -
Acuña Josie,
Sorenson Jacob,
Gades Anthony,
Wyatt Ryan,
Stea Nicholas,
Drachman Maili,
Adhikari Srikar
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
journal of ultrasound in medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.574
H-Index - 91
eISSN - 1550-9613
pISSN - 0278-4297
DOI - 10.1002/jum.15303
Subject(s) - medicine , mobile device , ultrasound , confidence interval , emergency ultrasound , usability , medical emergency , interventional radiology , competence (human resources) , emergency department , emergency medicine , medical physics , radiology , nursing , psychology , social psychology , human–computer interaction , computer science , operating system
Objectives The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of a handheld ultrasound device for difficult peripheral intravenous (PIV) access performed by nurses and paramedics in the emergency department (ED). Methods This was a retrospective review at an academic medical center. Participants were ED nurses and paramedics with competence in ultrasound‐guided PIV placement. Participants were asked to log their use of the handheld device when used on patients deemed to have “difficult” access and complete a questionnaire, which consisted of items related to the effectiveness and ease of use of the device. Data were collected over the course of 1 year. An electronic medical record review was performed to track the success rates and the occurrence of any associated complications throughout the hospital stay. Results Nurses and paramedics logged a total of 483 cases in which PIV access was attempted with the handheld ultrasound device. Ninety‐two percent (95% confidence interval [CI], 89%–94%) of the ultrasound‐guided PIV lines attempted were placed successfully. Eighty‐four percent (95% CI, 80%–87%) of the lines were placed successfully on the first attempt. In most cases (396 of 483 [82%]), no complications associated with the PIV occurred. A total of 429 questionnaires were completed over the study period. Most of the operators (84%; 95% CI, 80%–87%) stated that the handheld device was adequate to perform ultrasound‐guided PIV access. Conclusions The handheld ultrasound device performed well in terms of usability and reliability for PIV access.