Context and Policy Issues
Over time, advances in technology have allowed for previously bulky and fixed medical devices to become smaller and portable.1 This change has resulted in portable ultrasound machines that can be brought to the patient and be used at the point-of-care.1 As a result, point-of-care ultrasound technology is increasingly being used as a diagnostic tool.1 More recently, ultrasound devices have been made even smaller and more portable by pairing a wireless ultrasound probe with a smartphone or tablet via an application. There remain questions about the clinical effectiveness, safety of these new devices compared to existing portable ultrasound and standard ultrasound. Concerns have also been noted with regards to maintaining privacy and security of medical data collected with a cell phone.2
This topic was identified as part of CADTH’s Horizon Scanning Service for an early assessment bulletin. The objective of this Rapid Response report is to summarize the clinical effectiveness of smartphone-, tablet-, or app-based portable ultrasound devices.
Research Question
What is the clinical effectiveness of smartphone-, tablet-, or app-based portable ultrasound?
Key Findings
No evidence regarding the clinical effectiveness of smartphone-, tablet-, or app-based portable ultrasound was identified.
Methods
Literature Search Methods
A limited literature search was conducted by an information specialist on key resources including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, the University of York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) databases, the websites of Canadian and major international health technology agencies, as well as a focused Internet search. The search strategy was comprised of both controlled vocabulary, such as the National Library of Medicine’s MeSH (Medical Subject Headings), and keywords. The main search concept was app and smartphone-based portable ultrasound devices. No filters were applied to limit the retrieval by study type. Where possible, retrieval was limited to the human population. The search was also limited to English language documents published between January 1, 2014 and August 29, 2019.
Selection Criteria and Methods
One reviewer screened citations and selected studies. In the first level of screening, titles and abstracts were reviewed and potentially relevant articles were retrieved and assessed for inclusion. The final selection of full-text articles was based on the inclusion criteria presented in .
Exclusion Criteria
Articles were excluded if they did not meet the selection criteria outlined in , they were duplicate publications, or were published prior to 2014.
Critical Appraisal of Individual Studies
No relevant studies were identified.
Summary of Evidence
Quantity of Research Available
A total of 385 citations were identified in the literature search. Following screening of titles and abstracts, 380 citations were excluded and five potentially relevant reports from the electronic search were retrieved for full-text review. No potentially relevant publications were retrieved from the grey literature search for full text review. Of these potentially relevant articles, five publications were excluded for various reasons, and no publications met the inclusion criteria and were included in this report. Appendix 1 presents the PRISMA3 flowchart of the study selection.
Summary of Findings
No evidence was identified regarding the clinical effectiveness of smartphone-, tablet-, or app-based portable ultrasound; therefore, no summary can be provided.
Conclusions and Implications for Decision or Policy Making
It was not possible to determine the clinical effectiveness of smartphone-, tablet-, or app-based ultrasound devices. Future effectiveness and accuracy studies are needed to determine whether these devices are a suitable alternative to currently available portable and standard ultrasound devices.
References
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
Liberati
A, Altman
DG, Tetzlaff
J, Mulrow
C, Gotzsche
PC, Ioannidis
JP, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(10):e1–e34. [
PubMed: 19631507]
Appendix 1. Selection of Included Studies
About the Series
CADTH Rapid Response Report: Summary with Critical Appraisal
Funding: CADTH receives funding from Canada’s federal, provincial, and territorial governments, with the exception of Quebec.
Suggested citation:
Smartphone-, Tablet-, or App-Based Portable Ultrasound: A Review of Clinical Effectiveness. Ottawa: CADTH; 2019 Sep (CADTH rapid response report: summary with critical appraisal).
Disclaimer: The information in this document is intended to help Canadian health care decision-makers, health care professionals, health systems leaders, and policy-makers make well-informed decisions and thereby improve the quality of health care services. While patients and others may access this document, the document is made available for informational purposes only and no representations or warranties are made with respect to its fitness for any particular purpose. The information in this document should not be used as a substitute for professional medical advice or as a substitute for the application of clinical judgment in respect of the care of a particular patient or other professional judgment in any decision-making process. The Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) does not endorse any information, drugs, therapies, treatments, products, processes, or services.
While care has been taken to ensure that the information prepared by CADTH in this document is accurate, complete, and up-to-date as at the applicable date the material was first published by CADTH, CADTH does not make any guarantees to that effect. CADTH does not guarantee and is not responsible for the quality, currency, propriety, accuracy, or reasonableness of any statements, information, or conclusions contained in any third-party materials used in preparing this document. The views and opinions of third parties published in this document do not necessarily state or reflect those of CADTH.
CADTH is not responsible for any errors, omissions, injury, loss, or damage arising from or relating to the use (or misuse) of any information, statements, or conclusions contained in or implied by the contents of this document or any of the source materials.
This document may contain links to third-party websites. CADTH does not have control over the content of such sites. Use of third-party sites is governed by the third-party website owners’ own terms and conditions set out for such sites. CADTH does not make any guarantee with respect to any information contained on such third-party sites and CADTH is not responsible for any injury, loss, or damage suffered as a result of using such third-party sites. CADTH has no responsibility for the collection, use, and disclosure of personal information by third-party sites.
Subject to the aforementioned limitations, the views expressed herein are those of CADTH and do not necessarily represent the views of Canada’s federal, provincial, or territorial governments or any third party supplier of information.
This document is prepared and intended for use in the context of the Canadian health care system. The use of this document outside of Canada is done so at the user’s own risk.
This disclaimer and any questions or matters of any nature arising from or relating to the content or use (or misuse) of this document will be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the Province of Ontario and the laws of Canada applicable therein, and all proceedings shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the Province of Ontario, Canada.
