Pocket Size Ultra-Sound versus Cardiac Auscultation in Diagnosing Cardiac Valve Pathologies: A Prospective Cohort
Keywords:Auscultation, Diagnosis, Insonation, Medical students, Pocket ultrasound device, Point-of-care ultrasound, Valve disease
Background: Pocket-size ultrasound devices are used to perform focused ultrasound studies (POCUS). We compared valve malfunction diagnosis rate by cardiac auscultation to POCUS (insonation), both conducted by medical students.
Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted among subjects with and without clinically relevant valve dysfunction. Inclusion criteria for subjects with a clinically relevant valve dysfunction was based on the presence of at least one moderate severity valve pathology identified by echocardiography. Three final-year medical students examined the patients. Each subject underwent auscultation and a POCUS using a pocket-size ultrasound machine. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated.
Results: The study included 56 patients. In 18 patients (32%) no valve pathology was found. Nineteen patients (34%) had at least two valvular pathologies. Sixty valve lesions were present in the entire cohort. Students' sensitivity for detecting any valve lesion was 32% and 64% for auscultation and insonation, respectively, and specificity was similar. The sensitivity for diagnosing mitral regurgitation, mitral stenosis, and aortic regurgitation rose significantly by using POCUS compared to auscultation alone. When using POCUS, students identified valvular pathologies in 22 cases (39%) from the patients with at least two valve dysfunctions, and none when using auscultation.
Conclusions: Final-year medical students' competency to detect valve dysfunction by performing cardiac auscultation is poor. Cardiac ultrasound-focused training significantly improved medical students' sensitivity for diagnosing a variety of valve pathologies.
Mangione S. Cardiac auscultatory skills of physicians-in-training: a comparison of three English-speaking countries. Am J Med. 2001 Feb;110(3):210-6.
Spencer KT, Anderson AS, Bhargava A, Bales AC, Sorrentino M, Furlong K, et al. Physician-performed point-of-care echocardiography using a laptop platform compared with physical examination in the cardiovascular patient. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001 Jun;37(8):2013-8.
Sztajzel JM, Picard-Kossovsky M, Lerch R, Vuille C, Sarasin FP. Accuracy of cardiac auscultation in the era of Doppler-echocardiography: a comparison between cardiologists and internists. Int J Cardiol. 2010 Feb;138(3):308-10.
Mc Loughlin MJ, Mc Loughlin S. Cardiac auscultation: preliminary findings of a pilot study using continuous Wave Doppler and comparison with classic auscultation. Int J Cardiol. 2013 Jul;167(2):590-1.
Giannotti G, Mondillo S, Galderisi M, Barbati R, Zaca V, Ballo P, et al. Hand-held echocardiography: added value in clinical cardiological assessment. Cardiovasc Ultrasound. 2005 Mar 24;3:7.
Vourvouri EC, Koroleva LY, Ten Cate FJ, Poldermans D, Schinkel AF, van Domburg RT, et al. Clinical utility and cost effectiveness of a personal ultrasound imager for cardiac evaluation during consultation rounds in patients with suspected cardiac disease. Heart. 2003 Jul;89(7):727-30.
Scholten C, Rosenhek R, Binder T, Zehetgruber M, Maurer G, Baumgartner H. Hand-held miniaturized cardiac ultrasound instruments for rapid and effective bedside diagnosis and patient screening. J Eval Clin Pract. 2005 Feb;11(1):67-72.
Culp BC, Mock JD, Chiles CD, Culp WC, Jr. The pocket echocardiograph: validation and feasibility. Echocardiography. 2010 Aug;27(7):759-64.
Prinz C, Voigt JU. Diagnostic accuracy of a hand-held ultrasound scanner in routine patients referred for echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2011 Feb;24(2):111-6.
Khan HA, Wineinger NE, Uddin PQ, Mehta HS, Rubenson DS, Topol EJ. Can hospital rounds with pocket ultrasound by cardiologists reduce standard echocardiography? Am J Med. 2014 jul;127(7):669 e1-7.
Mehta M, Jacobson T, Peters D, Le E, Chadderdon S, Allen AJ, et al. Handheld ultrasound versus physical examination in patients referred for transthoracic echocardiography for a suspected cardiac condition. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014 Oct;7(10):983-90.
Vukanovic-Criley JM, Criley S, Warde CM, Boker JR, Guevara-Matheus L, Churchill WH, et al. Competency in cardiac examination skills in medical students, trainees, physicians, and faculty: a multicenter study. Arch Intern Med. 2006 Mar;166(6):610-6.
Stokke TM, Ruddox V, Sarvari SI, Otterstad JE, Aune E, Edvardsen T. Brief group training of medical students in focused cardiac ultrasound may improve diagnostic accuracy of physical examination. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2014 Nov;27(11):1238-46.
Steinmetz P, Dobrescu O, Oleskevich S, Lewis J. Bedside ultrasound education in Canadian medical schools: A national survey. Can Med Educ J. 2016 Mar;7(1):e78-86.
Narula J, Chandrashekhar Y, Braunwald E. Time to Add a Fifth Pillar to Bedside Physical Examination: Inspection, Palpation, Percussion, Auscultation, and Insonation. JAMA Cardiol. 2018 Apr;3(4):346-50.
Fuchs L, Gilad D, Mizrakli Y, Sadeh R, Galante O, Kobal S. Self-learning of point-of-care cardiac ultrasound - Can medical students teach themselves? PLoS One. 2018 Sep;13(9):e0204087.
Ben-Sasson A, Lior Y, Krispel J, Rucham M, Liel-Cohen N, Fuchs L, et al. Peer-teaching cardiac ultrasound among medical students: A real option. PLoS One. 2019 Mar;14(3):e0212794.
Prosch H, Radzina M, Dietrich CF, Nielsen MB, Baumann S, Ewertsen C, et al. Ultrasound Curricula of Student Education in Europe: Summary of the Experience. Ultrasound Int Open. 2020 Jun;6(1):E25-E33.
Nicholas E, Ly AA, Prince AM, Klawitter PF, Gaskin K, Prince LA. The Current Status of Ultrasound Education in United States Medical Schools. J Ultrasound Med. 2021 Nov;40(11):2459-2465.
- 2022-01-06 (3)
- 2021-12-16 (2)
- 2021-12-16 (1)
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2021 Lior Zeller, Lior Fuchs, Tomer Maman, Tali Shafat Fainguelernt, Ianiv Fainguelernt, Leonid Barski, Noah Liel-Cohen, Sergio L. Kobal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
- Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
- The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
- Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site; with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
- The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
- Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
- The Author represents and warrants that:
- the Work is the Author’s original work;
- the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
- the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
- the Work has not previously been published;
- the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
- the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
- The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from the Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.
Enforcement of copyright
The IJMS takes the protection of copyright very seriously.
If the IJMS discovers that you have used its copyright materials in contravention of the license above, the IJMS may bring legal proceedings against you seeking reparation and an injunction to stop you using those materials. You could also be ordered to pay legal costs.
If you become aware of any use of the IJMS' copyright materials that contravenes or may contravene the license above, please report this by email to email@example.com
If you become aware of any material on the website that you believe infringes your or any other person's copyright, please report this by email to firstname.lastname@example.org