Expanding Role of POCUS in ICU

 The Expanding Role of Point-of-Care Ultrasound in the Intensive Care Unit: A Review

Dr Neeraj Manikath, Claude.ai

Abstract

 

Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has evolved from a supplementary diagnostic tool to an essential component of critical care practice. This review explores the expanding applications of POCUS in the intensive care unit (ICU), evaluating its role in procedural guidance, hemodynamic assessment, respiratory management, neurological evaluation, and emerging frontiers. Evidence-based protocols and implementation strategies are discussed, alongside educational considerations for training the next generation of intensivists. As POCUS technology advances and its applications broaden, it continues to transform critical care practice by providing real-time, non-invasive assessment capabilities that enhance diagnostic accuracy, procedural safety, and clinical decision-making at the bedside.

Keywords: Point-of-care ultrasound; Critical care; Intensive care; Hemodynamic monitoring; Procedural guidance; Medical education

 Introduction

The landscape of critical care medicine has been profoundly transformed by the integration of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) into routine clinical practice. Once primarily a tool of radiologists, ultrasound has evolved to become an extension of the physical examination in the hands of intensivists, providing real-time, non-invasive visualization of anatomy and physiology directly at the bedside.^1,2^ This paradigm shift has been particularly impactful in the intensive care unit (ICU), where rapid assessment and intervention are often necessary in the care of critically ill patients.

The concept of POCUS differs fundamentally from comprehensive sonographic examinations performed by imaging specialists. Rather than exhaustive evaluation, POCUS involves focused examinations directed at answering specific clinical questions, often performed and interpreted immediately by the treating clinician.^3^ This approach aligns perfectly with the dynamic needs of critical care, where diagnostic and therapeutic decisions must frequently be made rapidly in response to evolving clinical scenarios.

The advantages of POCUS in the ICU setting are manifold. It provides immediate information without the need to transport critically ill patients, avoids radiation exposure, can be repeated as often as necessary, and allows for direct correlation between clinical findings and sonographic data.^4^ These attributes have catalyzed the expansion of POCUS applications beyond traditional uses such as procedural guidance for central venous catheterization, evolving into a comprehensive tool that addresses virtually every aspect of critical care practice.

This review aims to explore the current and emerging applications of POCUS in the ICU, evaluate the evidence supporting its use, discuss implementation strategies, and consider future directions. As postgraduate critical care fellows navigate their educational journey, understanding the expanding role of POCUS has become essential to delivering modern, evidence-based intensive care.

 Historical Perspective and Evolution

The journey of ultrasound in medicine began in the 1950s, but its specific application as a point-of-care tool in critical care settings emerged several decades later. The initial adoption of ultrasound in the ICU was primarily focused on procedural guidance for central venous catheterization, with landmark studies in the late 1990s and early 2000s demonstrating significant reductions in complications compared to traditional landmark techniques.^5,6^

The early 2000s witnessed the emergence of focused cardiac ultrasound protocols specifically designed for non-cardiologists, which served as a catalyst for broader adoption of POCUS in critical care.^7^ The development of the Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST) protocol further demonstrated the utility of targeted ultrasound examinations performed by clinicians at the bedside.^8^

Several factors facilitated the transition of ultrasound from the radiology department to the bedside. Technological advances led to more portable, user-friendly devices with improved image quality. Concurrently, educational initiatives emerged to train non-radiologist physicians in basic ultrasound applications. Professional societies began to recognize the importance of POCUS, developing guidelines and statement papers that endorsed its use in various clinical scenarios.^9,10^

Today, the evolution continues with the development of hand-held ultrasound devices that connect to smartphones or tablets, artificial intelligence-augmented interpretation, and cloud-based image storage solutions. These advancements have further reduced barriers to implementation and expanded the potential applications of POCUS in critical care.

 Core Applications in Critical Care

 Procedural Guidance

Perhaps the most established application of POCUS in the ICU is procedural guidance. Robust evidence supports the use of ultrasound for central venous catheter placement, demonstrating reduced mechanical complications, fewer insertion attempts, and higher first-pass success rates compared to landmark techniques.^11^ This evidence has led to recommendations from multiple professional societies advocating for routine ultrasound guidance for central line placement.^12^

Beyond central line placement, POCUS has proven valuable for:

- Arterial line placement, particularly in patients with difficult vascular access or shock
- Thoracentesis and paracentesis, reducing the risk of organ injury
- Percutaneous tracheostomy, identifying relevant anatomy and reducing complications
- Peripheral nerve blocks for analgesia
- Lumbar puncture, especially in patients with challenging anatomy

The use of POCUS for procedural guidance not only improves technical success rates but also enhances patient safety, potentially reducing iatrogenic complications that contribute to ICU morbidity and mortality.^13^

 Cardiovascular Assessment

Cardiovascular evaluation represents one of the most impactful applications of POCUS in the ICU. Focused cardiac ultrasound protocols such as FOCUS (Focused Cardiac Ultrasound) and FATE (Focus Assessed Transthoracic Echocardiography) enable rapid assessment of cardiac function and structure in critically ill patients.^14,15^

Key components of cardiovascular POCUS include:

- Left ventricular function assessment: Qualitative evaluation of contractility provides crucial information in managing shock and heart failure
- Right ventricular function: Identification of right heart strain in conditions such as pulmonary embolism
- Volume status assessment: Evaluation of inferior vena cava diameter and collapsibility
- Pericardial effusion detection: Early recognition of cardiac tamponade physiology
- Gross valvular abnormalities: Identification of significant valvular pathology that may contribute to hemodynamic compromise

The integration of cardiac POCUS with inferior vena cava (IVC) assessment and lung ultrasound creates a powerful tool for hemodynamic evaluation, allowing clinicians to differentiate between various shock states and guide fluid management decisions.^16^ This approach has demonstrated superior accuracy compared to traditional physical examination in determining the etiology of shock and has the potential to reduce time to appropriate intervention.^17^

 Pulmonary Applications

Lung ultrasound has emerged as a particularly valuable application of POCUS in the ICU, challenging the traditional notion that air-filled structures cannot be effectively evaluated with ultrasound.^18^ By interpreting various artifacts generated by the interaction of ultrasound waves with the pleura and underlying lung tissue, clinicians can identify a range of pathologies relevant to critical care.

The BLUE protocol (Bedside Lung Ultrasound in Emergency) provides a systematic approach to lung evaluation, facilitating rapid assessment of patients with acute respiratory failure.^19^ Key findings on lung ultrasound include:

- A-lines: Horizontal reverberation artifacts indicating normal aeration or pneumothorax (depending on presence of lung sliding)
- B-lines: Vertical artifacts arising from the pleural line, indicating interstitial syndromes (pulmonary edema, ARDS, pneumonia)
- Consolidation: Tissue-like pattern with air bronchograms indicating alveolar filling
- Pleural effusion: Anechoic or complex fluid collection in dependent regions
- Pneumothorax: Absence of lung sliding and presence of A-lines with lung point identification

Evidence supports the superior diagnostic accuracy of lung ultrasound compared to chest radiography for many common ICU pathologies, including pneumothorax, pleural effusion, pneumonia, and pulmonary edema.^20,21^ Furthermore, lung ultrasound can be used to guide respiratory interventions, evaluate diaphragmatic function, and assess the effectiveness of recruitment maneuvers and prone positioning in ARDS patients.^22^

 Neurological Applications

Neurocritical care has increasingly incorporated POCUS for evaluation of elevated intracranial pressure and cerebral blood flow. Optic nerve sheath diameter measurement has emerged as a non-invasive surrogate marker for intracranial pressure, with studies demonstrating good correlation with invasive ICP monitoring.^23^ A diameter exceeding 5-6 mm is suggestive of elevated intracranial pressure, potentially allowing earlier detection and intervention.

Transcranial Doppler ultrasound provides assessment of cerebral blood flow velocities, helping identify vasospasm following subarachnoid hemorrhage, monitor cerebral perfusion in traumatic brain injury, and evaluate for cerebral circulatory arrest in brain death determination.^24^ Despite technical challenges related to obtaining adequate acoustic windows through the skull, these applications have expanded the neurological assessment capabilities at the bedside.

Abdominal Applications

POCUS evaluation of the abdomen in ICU patients includes:

- Rapid assessment for free fluid using the FAST protocol
- Evaluation of the biliary system for cholecystitis or biliary obstruction
- Renal assessment for hydronephrosis or stone disease
- Aortic evaluation for aneurysm or dissection
- Bowel assessment for obstruction, ileus, or inflammatory conditions

Abdominal POCUS has demonstrated utility in identifying post-operative complications, evaluating for sources of sepsis, and monitoring response to interventions.^25^ When integrated with other POCUS applications, abdominal ultrasound contributes to comprehensive multi-organ evaluation of critically ill patients.

 Vascular Applications

Beyond procedural guidance, vascular POCUS has important diagnostic applications in the ICU:

- Deep venous thrombosis (DVT) screening using a focused two-point or three-point compression protocol
- Assessment of arterial flow in extremities, particularly in vasopressor-dependent patients
- Evaluation of arterial-venous fistulas in hemodialysis patients
- Identification of vascular causes of shock (aortic dissection, ruptured aneurysm)

The accuracy of focused DVT protocols performed by intensivists has been validated against comprehensive vascular studies, providing a valuable tool for bedside thrombosis screening in high-risk ICU patients.^26^

 Integrated Protocols and Multi-organ Assessment

The true power of POCUS in critical care becomes apparent when multiple applications are integrated into systematic protocols for comprehensive evaluation of complex clinical scenarios. Several protocols have been developed specifically for the ICU setting:

 RUSH Protocol (Rapid Ultrasound for Shock and Hypotension)

The RUSH protocol provides a structured approach to evaluating patients with undifferentiated shock, following the "pump, tank, pipes" conceptual framework:^27^

- Pump: Cardiac evaluation for contractility, pericardial effusion, and right heart strain
- Tank: Volume status assessment via IVC examination and lung fields (for pulmonary edema)
- Pipes: Evaluation of the aorta and assessment for DVT

Studies implementing the RUSH protocol have demonstrated improved diagnostic accuracy and reduced time to diagnosis in shock patients compared to conventional assessment methods.^28^

 SESAME Protocol (Sequential Emergency Scanning Assessing Mechanism Or Origin of Shock of Indistinct Cause)

The SESAME protocol offers another approach to evaluating critical patients with undifferentiated shock or cardiac arrest, incorporating lung, venous, cardiac, abdominal, and arterial ultrasound in a sequential manner.^29^

 The CORE Scan (Combined Organ Evaluation)

This protocol combines cardiac, pulmonary, and vascular ultrasound to provide a comprehensive hemodynamic assessment at the bedside, facilitating management decisions regarding fluid administration, vasopressor therapy, and inotropic support.^30^

These integrated protocols highlight how POCUS has evolved from application-specific uses to comprehensive diagnostic strategies that address complex critical care scenarios.

Implementation Strategies and Clinical Integration

Successful integration of POCUS into ICU practice requires thoughtful consideration of several factors:

 Equipment Selection

Considerations for POCUS equipment in the ICU setting include:

- Image quality and resolution
- Portability and ease of use
- Battery life and charging options
- Infection control features
- Storage and transmission capabilities
- Available probes (typically phased array, curvilinear, and linear)
- Cost and maintenance requirements

The optimal equipment depends on the specific needs and resources of each ICU, with options ranging from high-end portable systems to handheld devices connected to smartphones or tablets.^31^

 Quality Assurance and Image Archiving

Establishing systems for image storage, review, and quality assurance is essential for maintaining standards and facilitating continuous improvement. Options include:

- Integration with institutional picture archiving and communication systems (PACS)
- Cloud-based storage solutions
- Dedicated ultrasound archiving systems

Regular review of saved images by more experienced practitioners provides feedback that enhances skill development and ensures diagnostic accuracy.^32^

 Workflow Integration

Effective POCUS implementation requires thoughtful integration into clinical workflows. Strategies include:

- Developing standardized documentation templates
- Establishing clear triggers for POCUS evaluation
- Creating protocols for escalation when findings require advanced imaging
- Defining roles within the multidisciplinary team
- Ensuring adequate cleaning and infection control procedures

Studies have demonstrated that well-implemented POCUS programs can improve workflow efficiency and reduce time to diagnosis without disrupting other aspects of ICU care.^33^

 Educational Considerations

As POCUS becomes increasingly central to critical care practice, educational approaches have evolved to meet this growing need.

 Competency Development

Competency in critical care POCUS typically develops through a combination of:

- Didactic education on physics, knobology, and image interpretation
- Hands-on training with simulation models and healthy volunteers
- Supervised scanning of actual patients
- Image review sessions and feedback
- Ongoing quality assurance and portfolio development

Professional societies have proposed frameworks for competency assessment, typically requiring demonstration of both technical proficiency and interpretive skills.^34,35^

 Training Programs for Critical Care Fellows

Most critical care fellowship programs now incorporate POCUS training, though the depth and structure vary considerably. Elements of effective training programs include:

- Structured curriculum with defined learning objectives
- Regular hands-on scanning sessions with expert supervision
- Integration of POCUS into clinical rotations
- Assessment methods aligned with learning objectives
- Opportunities for advanced training for interested fellows

Some centers have implemented longitudinal POCUS curricula spanning the entire fellowship period, with progressive skill development from basic applications to more advanced techniques.^36^

 Continuing Education and Maintenance of Competency

For practicing intensivists who completed training before the widespread adoption of POCUS, various pathways exist for skill acquisition:

- Formal continuing medical education courses
- Hospital-based credentialing pathways
- Society-sponsored certification programs
- Mentorship relationships with experienced practitioners

Regardless of the initial training pathway, maintaining competency requires ongoing practice, periodic reassessment, and continuing education to stay current with evolving applications and technology.^37^

 Emerging Applications and Future Directions

The scope of POCUS in critical care continues to expand, with several emerging applications showing promise:

 Artificial Intelligence Integration

Machine learning algorithms are being developed to assist with image acquisition, interpretation, and clinical decision support:

- Automated recognition of cardiac views and measurement of key parameters
- Computer-aided detection of B-lines, consolidation, and pleural effusion
- Guidance systems for probe positioning and optimization
- Predictive analytics combining ultrasound findings with other clinical data

These technologies have the potential to reduce the learning curve for POCUS, improve diagnostic accuracy, and enhance the efficiency of examinations.^38^

 Contrast-Enhanced POCUS

While traditional POCUS relies on grayscale and Doppler imaging, contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) expands the diagnostic capabilities by improving visualization of tissue perfusion and vascular structures. Emerging applications in critical care include:

- Evaluation of solid organ injury in trauma
- Assessment of microcirculation in shock states
- Characterization of complex lesions and abscesses
- Evaluation of cerebral perfusion

As more portable machines incorporate contrast-specific imaging modes, these applications may become more accessible at the bedside.^39^

### Strain Imaging

Advanced echocardiographic techniques such as speckle tracking echocardiography allow for assessment of myocardial strain, potentially detecting subclinical myocardial dysfunction before changes in ejection fraction become apparent. This technology may prove valuable in:

- Early detection of septic cardiomyopathy
- Monitoring for cardiotoxicity from medications
- Evaluation of right ventricular function
- Assessment of ventricular-arterial coupling

As these advanced techniques become more automated and user-friendly, their integration into critical care practice may enhance cardiovascular assessment capabilities.^40^

Tissue Characterization

Emerging technologies allow for characterization of tissue properties using ultrasound:

- Elastography for assessment of liver fibrosis and potentially pulmonary fibrosis
- Acoustic radiation force impulse imaging for tissue stiffness evaluation
- Ultrasound evaluation of diaphragm thickness and function

These applications may expand the diagnostic capabilities of POCUS beyond anatomic and functional assessment to evaluation of tissue properties.^41^

Procedural Applications

Novel procedural applications continue to emerge:

- Ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous access programs
- Regional anesthesia for critically ill patients
- Guidance for percutaneous gastrostomy placement
- Navigation for complex drainage procedures

These applications further cement the role of POCUS as an essential tool for enhancing procedural safety and success in the ICU.^42^

Challenges and Limitations

Despite its expanding role, several challenges to POCUS implementation in critical care persist:

 Training and Competency Assurance

The rapid expansion of applications has created challenges in defining appropriate training standards and ensuring competency. Questions remain regarding:

- Minimum number of examinations required for competency
- Optimal assessment methods for different applications
- Strategies for maintaining skills over time
- Approaches to credentialing and privileging

Professional societies continue to refine recommendations in these areas, but significant variability remains in how institutions approach these issues.^43^

Technical Limitations

Several technical factors may limit the utility of POCUS in certain scenarios:

- Poor acoustic windows due to obesity, subcutaneous emphysema, or dressings
- Limitations in penetration depth with portable equipment
- Challenges in imaging small structures or deep targets
- Operator dependence and variability in image acquisition and interpretation

Technological advances continue to address some of these limitations, but awareness of these constraints remains important for appropriate clinical application.^44^

 Risk of Misinterpretation

As with any diagnostic modality, there exists potential for misinterpretation of POCUS findings, which may lead to inappropriate clinical decisions. This risk is magnified when:

- Practitioners exceed their level of competency
- Findings are not integrated with clinical context
- Technical limitations affect image quality
- Confirmation bias influences interpretation

Robust quality assurance programs and recognition of the limitations of focused examinations are essential to mitigate these risks.^45^

 Conclusion

The evolution of POCUS from a procedural adjunct to a comprehensive diagnostic and monitoring tool represents one of the most significant advancements in critical care practice in recent decades. The evidence supporting its use continues to expand across multiple applications, demonstrating improvements in diagnostic accuracy, procedural safety, and time to appropriate intervention.

For critical care fellows, developing proficiency in POCUS has become an essential component of training, providing skills that will remain valuable throughout their careers. As technology advances and applications continue to expand, the integration of POCUS into critical care practice is likely to deepen further, potentially transforming our approach to monitoring and managing critically ill patients.

Future research should focus on defining optimal training pathways, validating emerging applications, and demonstrating impact on patient-centered outcomes. As we move forward, maintaining a thoughtful balance between enthusiasm for this powerful technology and awareness of its limitations will be essential to maximizing its benefit for patients in the intensive care unit.

 References

1. Moore CL, Copel JA. Point-of-care ultrasonography. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(8):749-757.
2. Narula J, Chandrashekhar Y, Braunwald E. Time to add a fifth pillar to bedside physical examination: inspection, palpation, percussion, auscultation, and insonation. JAMA Cardiol. 2018;3(4):346-350.
3. Neri L, Storti E, Lichtenstein D. Toward an ultrasound curriculum for critical care medicine. Crit Care Med. 2007;35(5 Suppl):S290-S304.
4. Zieleskiewicz L, Muller L, Lakhal K, et al. Point-of-care ultrasound in intensive care units: assessment of 1073 procedures in a multicentric, prospective, observational study. Intensive Care Med. 2015;41(9):1638-1647.
5. Hind D, Calvert N, McWilliams R, et al. Ultrasonic locating devices for central venous cannulation: meta-analysis. BMJ. 2003;327(7411):361.
6. Karakitsos D, Labropoulos N, De Groot E, et al. Real-time ultrasound-guided catheterisation of the internal jugular vein: a prospective comparison with the landmark technique in critical care patients. Crit Care. 2006;10(6):R162.
7. Spencer KT, Kimura BJ, Korcarz CE, Pellikka PA, Rahko PS, Siegel RJ. Focused cardiac ultrasound: recommendations from the American Society of Echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2013;26(6):567-581.
8. Rozycki GS, Ochsner MG, Schmidt JA, et al. A prospective study of surgeon-performed ultrasound as the primary adjuvant modality for injured patient assessment. J Trauma. 1995;39(3):492-498.
9. Frankel HL, Kirkpatrick AW, Elbarbary M, et al. Guidelines for the appropriate use of bedside general and cardiac ultrasonography in the evaluation of critically ill patients-part I: general ultrasonography. Crit Care Med. 2015;43(11):2479-2502.
10. Levitov A, Frankel HL, Blaivas M, et al. Guidelines for the appropriate use of bedside general and cardiac ultrasonography in the evaluation of critically ill patients-part II: cardiac ultrasonography. Crit Care Med. 2016;44(6):1206-1227.
11. Brass P, Hellmich M, Kolodziej L, Schick G, Smith AF. Ultrasound guidance versus anatomical landmarks for internal jugular vein catheterization. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;1:CD006962.
12. Troianos CA, Hartman GS, Glas KE, et al. Guidelines for performing ultrasound guided vascular cannulation: recommendations of the American Society of Echocardiography and the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2011;24(12):1291-1318.
13. Soni NJ, Arntfield R, Kory P. Point-of-Care Ultrasound for the Hospitalist. Hospital Medicine Clinics. 2015;4(1):1-53.
14. Jensen MB, Sloth E, Larsen KM, Schmidt MB. Transthoracic echocardiography for cardiopulmonary monitoring in intensive care. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2004;21(9):700-707.
15. Via G, Hussain A, Wells M, et al. International evidence-based recommendations for focused cardiac ultrasound. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2014;27(7):683.e1-683.e33.
16. Blanco P, Volpicelli G. Common pitfalls in point-of-care ultrasound: a practical guide for emergency and critical care physicians. Crit Ultrasound J. 2016;8(1):15.
17. Jones AE, Tayal VS, Sullivan DM, Kline JA. Randomized, controlled trial of immediate versus delayed goal-directed ultrasound to identify the cause of nontraumatic hypotension in emergency department patients. Crit Care Med. 2004;32(8):1703-1708.
18. Lichtenstein DA. BLUE-protocol and FALLS-protocol: two applications of lung ultrasound in the critically ill. Chest. 2015;147(6):1659-1670.
19. Lichtenstein DA, Mezière GA. Relevance of lung ultrasound in the diagnosis of acute respiratory failure: the BLUE protocol. Chest. 2008;134(1):117-125.
20. Xirouchaki N, Magkanas E, Vaporidi K, et al. Lung ultrasound in critically ill patients: comparison with bedside chest radiography. Intensive Care Med. 2011;37(9):1488-1493.
21. Llamas-Álvarez AM, Tenza-Lozano EM, Latour-Pérez J. Accuracy of lung ultrasonography in the diagnosis of pneumonia in adults: systematic review and meta-analysis. Chest. 2017;151(2):374-382.
22. Bouhemad B, Brisson H, Le-Guen M, Arbelot C, Lu Q, Rouby JJ. Bedside ultrasound assessment of positive end-expiratory pressure-induced lung recruitment. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2011;183(3):341-347.
23. Robba C, Santori G, Czosnyka M, et al. Optic nerve sheath diameter measured sonographically as non-invasive estimator of intracranial pressure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med. 2018;44(8):1284-1294.
24. Purkayastha S, Sorond F. Transcranial Doppler ultrasound: technique and application. Semin Neurol. 2012;32(4):411-420.
25. Perera P, Mailhot T, Riley D, Mandavia D. The RUSH exam: Rapid Ultrasound in SHock in the evaluation of the critically ill. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2010;28(1):29-56, vii.
26. Kory PD, Pellecchia CM, Shiloh AL, Mayo PH, DiBello C, Koenig S. Accuracy of ultrasonography performed by critical care physicians for the diagnosis of DVT. Chest. 2011;139(3):538-542.
27. Seif D, Perera P, Mailhot T, Riley D, Mandavia D. Bedside ultrasound in resuscitation and the rapid ultrasound in shock protocol. Crit Care Res Pract. 2012;2012:503254.
28. Ghane MR, Gharib M, Ebrahimi A, et al. Accuracy of early rapid ultrasound in shock (RUSH) examination performed by emergency physician for diagnosis of shock etiology in critically ill patients. J Emerg Trauma Shock. 2015;8(1):5-10.
29. Lichtenstein D, Malbrain ML. Critical care ultrasound in cardiac arrest. Technological requirements for performing the SESAME-protocol--a holistic approach. Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther. 2015;47(5):471-481.
30. Manasia AR, Nagaraj HM, Kodali RB, et al. Feasibility and potential clinical utility of goal-directed transthoracic echocardiography performed by noncardiologist intensivists using a small hand-carried device (SonoHeart) in critically ill patients. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2005;19(2):155-159.
31. Haji DL, Royse A, Royse CF. Review article: Clinical impact of non-cardiologist-performed transthoracic echocardiography in emergency medicine, intensive care medicine and anaesthesia. Emerg Med Australas. 2013;25(1):4-12.
32. Bahner DP, Goldman E, Way D, Royall NA, Liu YT. The state of ultrasound education in U.S. medical schools: results of a national survey. Acad Med. 2014;89(12):1681-1686.
33. Zieleskiewicz L, Cornesse A, Hammad E, et al. Implementation of lung ultrasound in polyvalent intensive care unit: Impact on irradiation and medical costs. Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2015;34(1):41-44.
34. Mayo PH, Beaulieu Y, Doelken P, et al. American College of Chest Physicians/La Société de Réanimation de Langue Française statement on competence in critical care ultrasonography. Chest. 2009;135(4):1050-1060.
35. Expert Round Table on Ultrasound in ICU. International expert statement on training standards for critical care ultrasonography. Intensive Care Med. 2011;37(7):1077-1083.
36. Dinh VA, Giri PC, Rathinavel I, et al. Impact of a 2-day critical care ultrasound course during fellowship training: a pilot study. Crit Care Res Pract. 2015;2015:675041.
37. Ultrasound Guidelines: Emergency, Point-of-Care and Clinical Ultrasound Guidelines in Medicine. Ann Emerg Med. 2017;69(5):e27-e54.
38. Muse ED, Topol EJ. Guiding ultrasound image capture with artificial intelligence. Lancet. 2020;396(10253):749.
39. Dietrich CF, Averkiou M, Nielsen MB, et al. How to perform Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS). Ultrasound Int Open. 2018;4(1):E2-E15.
40. Narasimhan M, Koenig S, Mayo PH. Advanced echocardiography for the critical care physician: part 1. Chest. 2014;145(1):129-134.
41. Koenig SJ, Narasimhan M, Mayo PH. Thoracic ultrasonography for the pulmonary specialist. Chest. 2011;140(5):1332-1341.
42. Saugel B, Scheeren TWL, Teboul JL. Ultrasound-guided central venous catheter placement: a structured review and recommendations for clinical practice. Crit Care. 2017;21(1):225.
43. Hussain A, Via G, Melniker L, et al. Multi-organ point-of-care ultrasound for COVID-19 (PoCUS4COVID): international expert consensus. Crit Care. 2020;24(1):702.
44. Volpicelli G, Elbarbary M, Blaivas M, et al. International evidence-based recommendations for point-of-care lung ultrasound. Intensive Care Med. 2012;38(4):577-591.
45. Soni NJ, Schnobrich D, Matthews BK, et al. Point-of-care ultrasound for hospitalists: a position statement of the Society of Hospital Medicine. J Hosp Med. 2019;14:E1-E6.