Acta clinica Belgica · 2026
Impact of point-of-care ultrasound in right upper quadrant abdominal pain in an emergency department: cost analysis.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Dupriez Florence, Druez Delphine, Ries Apolline, Stevens France, Penaloza Andrea, Rodrigues de Castro Bastian
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) offers high diagnostic performance for the assessment of right upper quadrant (RUQ) abdominal pain. We sought to assess the economic impact on society and patients of using PoCUS for RUQ pain assessment.
METHODS: This study constitutes a secondary analysis based on a prospective, interventional, multicenter cohort study conducted in five Belgian emergency departments in 2023 that evaluated PoCUS's impact on the diagnostic process for patients with RUQ pain. The comparison was made between the estimated costs based on the diagnostic and therapeutic plan established before PoCUS and the actual costs after PoCUS integration.
RESULTS: Using PoCUS for RUQ pain in the emergency department saved an average of €69.1 per patient (p < 0.01). The Belgian National Institute for Health and Disability Insurance saved an average of €66.5 and the patient €2.6 (p < 0.01). This saving remained significant (p < 0.01) when PoCUS was charged at €25. When the PoCUS result was negative, €57.5 (p < 0.01) were saved and €81.5 when the result was positive (p < 0.01). Total savings for complementary examinations were €61.3 and €7.8 for treatments (p < 0.01).
CONCLUSION: PoCUS use in abdominal RUQ pain assessment had a positive financial impact on society, even when PoCUS billing costs were taken into account. Costs associated with complementary examinations and treatments were reduced, regardless of whether PoCUS results were positive or negative.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05438654.
METHODS: This study constitutes a secondary analysis based on a prospective, interventional, multicenter cohort study conducted in five Belgian emergency departments in 2023 that evaluated PoCUS's impact on the diagnostic process for patients with RUQ pain. The comparison was made between the estimated costs based on the diagnostic and therapeutic plan established before PoCUS and the actual costs after PoCUS integration.
RESULTS: Using PoCUS for RUQ pain in the emergency department saved an average of €69.1 per patient (p < 0.01). The Belgian National Institute for Health and Disability Insurance saved an average of €66.5 and the patient €2.6 (p < 0.01). This saving remained significant (p < 0.01) when PoCUS was charged at €25. When the PoCUS result was negative, €57.5 (p < 0.01) were saved and €81.5 when the result was positive (p < 0.01). Total savings for complementary examinations were €61.3 and €7.8 for treatments (p < 0.01).
CONCLUSION: PoCUS use in abdominal RUQ pain assessment had a positive financial impact on society, even when PoCUS billing costs were taken into account. Costs associated with complementary examinations and treatments were reduced, regardless of whether PoCUS results were positive or negative.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05438654.