Does size matter? a prospective study on the feasibility of using a handheld ultrasound device in place of a cart-based system in the evaluation of trauma patients

BACKGROUND:As emergency physicians are looking at handheld devices as alternatives to the traditional, cart-based systems, concerns center around whether they are forsaking image quality for a lower price point and whether the handheld can be trusted for medical decision making. OBJECTIVE:We aimed to determine the feasibility of using a handheld ultrasound device in place of a cart-based system during the evaluation of trauma patients using the Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST) examination. METHODS:This was a prospective study of adult trauma patients who received a FAST examination as part of their evaluation. A FAST examination was performed using a cart-based machine and a handheld device. The results of the examinations were compared with computed tomography imaging. Images obtained from both ultrasound devices were reviewed by an expert for image quality. RESULTS:A total of 62 patients were enrolled in the study. The mean (SD) time to perform a FAST examination using the handheld device was 307.3 (65.3) s, which was significantly less (p = 0.002) than the 336.1 (86.8) s with the cart-based machine. There was strong agreement between the examination results of the handheld and cart-based devices and between the handheld and computed tomography. Image quality scores obtained with the handheld device were lower than those from the cart-based system. Most operators and reviewers agreed that the images obtained from the handheld were adequate for medical decision making. CONCLUSIONS:Data support that it is feasible to use the handheld ultrasound device for evaluation of the trauma patient in place of the cart-based system.