Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2012 Apr;38(4):577-91.
doi: 10.1007/s00134-012-2513-4. Epub 2012 Mar 6.

International evidence-based recommendations for point-of-care lung ultrasound

Affiliations
Review

International evidence-based recommendations for point-of-care lung ultrasound

Giovanni Volpicelli et al. Intensive Care Med. 2012 Apr.

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study is to provide evidence-based and expert consensus recommendations for lung ultrasound with focus on emergency and critical care settings.

Methods: A multidisciplinary panel of 28 experts from eight countries was involved. Literature was reviewed from January 1966 to June 2011. Consensus members searched multiple databases including Pubmed, Medline, OVID, Embase, and others. The process used to develop these evidence-based recommendations involved two phases: determining the level of quality of evidence and developing the recommendation. The quality of evidence is assessed by the grading of recommendation, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) method. However, the GRADE system does not enforce a specific method on how the panel should reach decisions during the consensus process. Our methodology committee decided to utilize the RAND appropriateness method for panel judgment and decisions/consensus.

Results: Seventy-three proposed statements were examined and discussed in three conferences held in Bologna, Pisa, and Rome. Each conference included two rounds of face-to-face modified Delphi technique. Anonymous panel voting followed each round. The panel did not reach an agreement and therefore did not adopt any recommendations for six statements. Weak/conditional recommendations were made for 2 statements, and strong recommendations were made for the remaining 65 statements. The statements were then recategorized and grouped to their current format. Internal and external peer-review processes took place before submission of the recommendations. Updates will occur at least every 4 years or whenever significant major changes in evidence appear.

Conclusions: This document reflects the overall results of the first consensus conference on "point-of-care" lung ultrasound. Statements were discussed and elaborated by experts who published the vast majority of papers on clinical use of lung ultrasound in the last 20 years. Recommendations were produced to guide implementation, development, and standardization of lung ultrasound in all relevant settings.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2006 Mar;19(3):356-63 - PubMed
    1. Crit Care Med. 2007 May;35(5 Suppl):S250-61 - PubMed
    1. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2008 Feb;14(1):70-4 - PubMed
    1. Cardiovasc Ultrasound. 2008 Apr 29;6:16 - PubMed
    1. Radiology. 2002 Oct;225(1):210-4 - PubMed