↓ Skip to main content

A majority of rural emergency departments in the province of Quebec use point-of-care ultrasound: a cross-sectional survey

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Emergency Medicine, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
15 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A majority of rural emergency departments in the province of Quebec use point-of-care ultrasound: a cross-sectional survey
Published in
BMC Emergency Medicine, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12873-015-0063-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pierre Léger, Richard Fleet, Julie Maltais- Giguère, Jeff Plant, Éric Piette, France Légaré, Julien Poitras

Abstract

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. 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. 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. 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.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 89 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 13%
Student > Master 11 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 9%
Student > Postgraduate 7 8%
Other 6 7%
Other 20 22%
Unknown 25 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 45%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Unspecified 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 28 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 October 2022.
All research outputs
#1,979,465
of 26,220,821 outputs
Outputs from BMC Emergency Medicine
#58
of 905 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,473
of 398,146 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Emergency Medicine
#6
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,220,821 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 905 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 398,146 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.