Factors affecting point-of-care ultrasound implementation in general practice : a survey in Danish primary care clinics
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ..
OBJECTIVE: The implementation of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in general practice varies, but it is unknown what determines this variation. The purpose of this study was to explore (1) the overall proportion of POCUS-users among general practitioners (GPs), (2) the current use of POCUS by GPs, (3) factors related to the implementation of POCUS in general practice and (4) GPs' concerns related to POCUS use in general practice.
DESIGN: An online survey was distributed in June 2019.
SETTING: General practice.
PARTICIPANTS: GPs working in office-based primary care clinics in Denmark.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The questionnaire was developed using mixed methods and included questions about participants' characteristics, past POCUS training and experience, capability, opportunity and motivation for using POCUS in the primary care setting. Results were summarised using descriptive statistics. Association between GPs' background characteristics and POCUS use was tested using logistics regression.
RESULTS: Responses were analysed from 1216 questionnaires corresponding to 36.4% of all GPs in Denmark. The majority (72.3%) of participants had previous POCUS experience, 14.7% had access to a POCUS device and 11.5% used POCUS. Several factors motivated participants to use POCUS. However, barriers existed such as lack of remuneration and high workload. Additionally, many GPs questioned their ability to scan with sufficient diagnostic accuracy and the impact of POCUS on the consultation. Of non-users, 28.7% believed they would be using POCUS in the future.
CONCLUSION: Although, the majority of GPs had past experience with POCUS and felt motivated to use it, few had implemented POCUS. Several factors influenced the GPs' capability, opportunity and motivation for using POCUS and several concerns were registered by non-users.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2023 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2023 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:13 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
BMJ open - 13(2023), 10 vom: 17. Okt., Seite e077702 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Andersen, Camilla Aakjær [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Diagnostic Imaging |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 23.10.2023 Date Revised 23.10.2023 published: Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1136/bmjopen-2023-077702 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM36340841X |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM36340841X | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231226211034.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231226s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-077702 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1211.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM36340841X | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)37848298 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Andersen, Camilla Aakjær |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Factors affecting point-of-care ultrasound implementation in general practice |b a survey in Danish primary care clinics |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 23.10.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 23.10.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. | ||
| 520 | |a OBJECTIVE: The implementation of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in general practice varies, but it is unknown what determines this variation. The purpose of this study was to explore (1) the overall proportion of POCUS-users among general practitioners (GPs), (2) the current use of POCUS by GPs, (3) factors related to the implementation of POCUS in general practice and (4) GPs' concerns related to POCUS use in general practice | ||
| 520 | |a DESIGN: An online survey was distributed in June 2019 | ||
| 520 | |a SETTING: General practice | ||
| 520 | |a PARTICIPANTS: GPs working in office-based primary care clinics in Denmark | ||
| 520 | |a MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The questionnaire was developed using mixed methods and included questions about participants' characteristics, past POCUS training and experience, capability, opportunity and motivation for using POCUS in the primary care setting. Results were summarised using descriptive statistics. Association between GPs' background characteristics and POCUS use was tested using logistics regression | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: Responses were analysed from 1216 questionnaires corresponding to 36.4% of all GPs in Denmark. The majority (72.3%) of participants had previous POCUS experience, 14.7% had access to a POCUS device and 11.5% used POCUS. Several factors motivated participants to use POCUS. However, barriers existed such as lack of remuneration and high workload. Additionally, many GPs questioned their ability to scan with sufficient diagnostic accuracy and the impact of POCUS on the consultation. Of non-users, 28.7% believed they would be using POCUS in the future | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSION: Although, the majority of GPs had past experience with POCUS and felt motivated to use it, few had implemented POCUS. Several factors influenced the GPs' capability, opportunity and motivation for using POCUS and several concerns were registered by non-users | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Diagnostic Imaging | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Primary Health Care | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Surveys and Questionnaires | |
| 650 | 4 | |a ULTRASONOGRAPHY | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Ultrasound | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Brodersen, John Brandt |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Graumann, Ole |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Davidsen, Annette Sofie |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Jensen, Martin Bach |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t BMJ open |d 2012 |g 13(2023), 10 vom: 17. Okt., Seite e077702 |w (DE-627)NLM215724372 |x 2044-6055 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:13 |g year:2023 |g number:10 |g day:17 |g month:10 |g pages:e077702 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-077702 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 13 |j 2023 |e 10 |b 17 |c 10 |h e077702 | ||