We have located links that may give you full text access.
Heterogeneity of Doppler waveform description is decreased with the use of a dedicated classification.
VASA. Zeitschrift Für Gefässkrankheiten 2018 October
BACKGROUND: The analysis of Doppler ultrasound waveforms (DW) provides a method for detecting and evaluating arterial stenosis in the lower limb arteries but no recommendation exists on how to describe the DWs. Aims of this study were to assess the heterogeneity of the description of DWs among vascular residents and the impact of the use of a 4-item classification.
METHODS: Thirty different DWs were presented to residents using Microsoft PowerPoint® slides. They were invited to describe the 30 DWs before and after the presentation of a 4-item classification (triphasic, biphasic, monophasic, and others). The heterogeneity was assessed by the number of different answers used by the residents. Nineteen residents with six to eighteen months of vascular medicine training and ultrasound experience were included.
RESULTS: The average of different answers was 9 ± 4 for the whole analysis of the 30 DWs without the use of a specific classification, whereas the average was 2 ± 1 using the 4-item classification (p < 0.005). There was a significant difference in correct answers, i. e. in combined continuous waveforms and pulsed waveforms between experienced residents and younger residents (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Using a 4-item classification for DWs reduced the heterogeneity of the DW description. There is an urgent need to standardize the DW description in order to improve the patients care with peripheral artery disease.
METHODS: Thirty different DWs were presented to residents using Microsoft PowerPoint® slides. They were invited to describe the 30 DWs before and after the presentation of a 4-item classification (triphasic, biphasic, monophasic, and others). The heterogeneity was assessed by the number of different answers used by the residents. Nineteen residents with six to eighteen months of vascular medicine training and ultrasound experience were included.
RESULTS: The average of different answers was 9 ± 4 for the whole analysis of the 30 DWs without the use of a specific classification, whereas the average was 2 ± 1 using the 4-item classification (p < 0.005). There was a significant difference in correct answers, i. e. in combined continuous waveforms and pulsed waveforms between experienced residents and younger residents (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Using a 4-item classification for DWs reduced the heterogeneity of the DW description. There is an urgent need to standardize the DW description in order to improve the patients care with peripheral artery disease.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app