MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285259171 · doi:10.2478/jhp-2022-0008

Point of care ultrasonography in patients with haemophilia and acute haemarthrosis: a physiotherapist and sonographer inter-professional agreement pilot study

2022· article· en· W4285259171 on OpenAlexaff
Karen Strike, Anthony K.C. Chan, Monica R. Maly, Nina Stein, Lynne Farrell, Patricia Solomon

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Haemophilia Practice · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesMcMaster Children's HospitalUniversity of WaterlooMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSonographerMedicineHaemophiliaPhysical therapyUltrasonographySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Haemophilia treatment centres (HTCs) around the world are increasingly adopting point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS) for the assessment of acute haemarthrosis and to monitor joint health. POCUS is in large part administered by physiotherapists in most comprehensive care teams. Appropriate implementation of haemophilia-specific POCUS requires an educational foundation and training to ensure competency and optimal outcomes. Inter-professional agreement and evaluation of image quality are important measures of competency and acceptable use of POCUS. Aims To determine the level of agreement between physiotherapist and sonographer-performed POCUS scans and to compare the quality of the ultrasound images obtained by physiotherapists to those obtained by the sonographer. Methods This single blind, prospective, pilot study recruited patients with haemophilia A and B who presented to clinic with a suspected acute haemarthrosis of the elbow, knee, or ankle and consented to participate. POCUS scans were performed by one trained physiotherapist and one sonographer in the haemophilia ambulatory clinic at patient presentation, one-week follow-up, and two-week follow-up. The physiotherapist participated in formal training consisting of 12 hours of online didactic modules and a two-day, 12-hour practical module with instructor-led hands-on training. For the primary objective, the outcome of interest was the binary decision on the presence or absence of blood within the joint. For the secondary objective, image quality was evaluated by the radiologist post hoc and rated as optimal, acceptable, or sub-optimal. Results Thirteen participants with haemophilia consented to the study. The results indicated an excellent level of agreement (k=0.80) with an observed agreement of 91.7%, a specific positive agreement of 94.1%, and a specific negative agreement of 85.7% for the detection of blood within the joint space. The quality of the ultrasound images obtained by the physiotherapist were rated by the radiologist as optimal (84.6%) and acceptable (15.4%). None of the images were rated as sub-optimal. Conclusion Optimal image quality and a high level of agreement between the physiotherapist and sonographer-performed POCUS for the assessment of acute hemarthrosis in people with haemophilia A and B was observed. These results suggest that, with a short formal training programme, physiotherapists can be proficient in the performance, acquisition, and interpretation of POCUS scans in patients with haemophilia.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.581

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Haemophilia PracticeSame topicHemophilia Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207