Accès libre

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

, , , ,  et   
20 mai 2022
À propos de cet article

Citez
Télécharger la couverture

With appropriate training, physiotherapists can perform and interpret point-of-care ultrasound scans for the assessment of acute haemarthrosis to a level comparable to an experienced sonographer© Shutterstock
With appropriate training, physiotherapists can perform and interpret point-of-care ultrasound scans for the assessment of acute haemarthrosis to a level comparable to an experienced sonographer© Shutterstock

Figure 1

Patient position and transducer orientation for posterior elbow joint recess
Patient position and transducer orientation for posterior elbow joint recess

Figure 2

Right elbow, posterior joint recess in long axis with overlying triceps tendon
Right elbow, posterior joint recess in long axis with overlying triceps tendon

Figure 3

Patient position and transducer orientation for suprapatellar anterior joint recess
Patient position and transducer orientation for suprapatellar anterior joint recess

Figure 4

Right knee, suprapatellar anterior joint recess
Right knee, suprapatellar anterior joint recess

Figure 5

undefined

Figure 6

undefined

Figure 7

undefined

Figure 8

undefined

Figure 9

Patient position and transducer orientation for anterior tibiotalar joint recess
Patient position and transducer orientation for anterior tibiotalar joint recess

Figure 10

Right tibiotalar joint, anterior joint recess in sagittal plane with overlying anterior tibialis tendon
Right tibiotalar joint, anterior joint recess in sagittal plane with overlying anterior tibialis tendon

Quality of ultrasound images

QUALITY OF ULTRASOUND IMAGES
OPTIMAL ACCEPTABLE SUB-OPTIMAL
Physiotherapist 84.6% 15.4% 0%
Sonographer 88.9% 11.1% 0%

Level of agreement on the presence or absence of blood within the joint

KAPPA COEFFICIENT AGREEMENT

Overall (n= 36) k=0.80 (95% CI, 0.59–1.00) p=0.000 Prevalence: 70.8%OA: 91.7%SPA: 94.1%SNA: 85.7%