Abstract：
BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in the use of point-of-care ultrasound during cardiac arrest, but few studies document its use in the intensive care unit.
OBJECTIVE: We hypothesised this may reflect a low prevalence of use of point-of-care ultrasound during cardiac arrest or negative attitudes towards its use. We aimed to determine the self-reported prevalence, attitudes towards, and barriers to use of point-of-care ultrasound during cardiac arrest in the intensive care unit.
METHODS: We conducted a web-based survey over 3 months (08/08/2022-06/11/2022), of intensive care unit consultants and registrars in Victoria, Australia. Descriptive and mixed-methods analyses of Likert-type and free-text answers were performed.
RESULTS: The response rate was 91/398 (22.8%), split evenly between consultants and registrars. There was a broad range of clinical and ultrasound experience. Only 22.4% (22/91) of respondents reported using point-of-care ultrasound 75-100% of the time during their management of cardiac arrest. Respondents rated the value they place in point-of-care ultrasound during cardiac arrest 3 (interquartile range: 3-4) and that of a \"skilled operator\" 4 ((interquartile range; 4-5) on a 5-point scale. Free-text analysis suggested exclusion of \"tamponade\" (40/80 [50%] comments) as the most valuable use-case and \"skill\" as a personal barrier (20/73 [27.4%] comments). Personal and departmental barriers were not rated highly, although registrars perceived \"lack of a structured training program\" as a barrier. Respondents were equivocal in the value they gave point-of-care ultrasound during cardiac arrest but saw greater value when conducted by a skilled operator.
CONCLUSIONS: Point-of-care ultrasound was reported to be infrequently used in cardiac arrest, mostly due to self-perceived skill and lack of a structured training program.
OBJECTIVE: We hypothesised this may reflect a low prevalence of use of point-of-care ultrasound during cardiac arrest or negative attitudes towards its use. We aimed to determine the self-reported prevalence, attitudes towards, and barriers to use of point-of-care ultrasound during cardiac arrest in the intensive care unit.
METHODS: We conducted a web-based survey over 3 months (08/08/2022-06/11/2022), of intensive care unit consultants and registrars in Victoria, Australia. Descriptive and mixed-methods analyses of Likert-type and free-text answers were performed.
RESULTS: The response rate was 91/398 (22.8%), split evenly between consultants and registrars. There was a broad range of clinical and ultrasound experience. Only 22.4% (22/91) of respondents reported using point-of-care ultrasound 75-100% of the time during their management of cardiac arrest. Respondents rated the value they place in point-of-care ultrasound during cardiac arrest 3 (interquartile range: 3-4) and that of a \"skilled operator\" 4 ((interquartile range; 4-5) on a 5-point scale. Free-text analysis suggested exclusion of \"tamponade\" (40/80 [50%] comments) as the most valuable use-case and \"skill\" as a personal barrier (20/73 [27.4%] comments). Personal and departmental barriers were not rated highly, although registrars perceived \"lack of a structured training program\" as a barrier. Respondents were equivocal in the value they gave point-of-care ultrasound during cardiac arrest but saw greater value when conducted by a skilled operator.
CONCLUSIONS: Point-of-care ultrasound was reported to be infrequently used in cardiac arrest, mostly due to self-perceived skill and lack of a structured training program.
摘要：
背景：在心脏骤停期间使用定点护理超声越来越感兴趣，但很少有研究记录它在重症监护病房的使用。
目的：我们假设这可能反映了在心脏骤停期间使用现场护理超声的患病率较低或对其使用的消极态度。我们的目标是确定自我报告的患病率，态度,以及在重症监护病房心脏骤停期间使用即时超声的障碍。
方法：我们进行了为期3个月的网络调查（2022年8月8日-2022年11月6日），维多利亚州的重症监护病房顾问和注册服务商，澳大利亚。对Likert类型和自由文本答案进行了描述性和混合方法分析。
结果：反应率为91/398（22.8%），在顾问和注册商之间平均分配。有广泛的临床和超声经验。只有22.4％（22/91）的受访者报告在管理心脏骤停期间使用了75-100％的护理点超声。受访者在心脏骤停3（四分位范围：3-4）和“熟练操作员”4（（四分位范围；4-5）的情况下对他们在现场护理超声中的价值进行了评分5点量表。自由文本分析建议排除“填塞”（40/80[50%]评论）作为最有价值的用例，排除“技能”作为个人障碍（20/73[27.4%]评论）。个人和部门障碍的评价不高，尽管注册服务商认为“缺乏结构化的培训计划”是一个障碍。受访者在心脏骤停期间给予即时超声的价值是模棱两可的，但由熟练的操作员进行时，他们看到了更大的价值。
结论：据报道，在心脏骤停中很少使用护理点超声，主要是由于自我感知的技能和缺乏结构化的培训计划。
目的：我们假设这可能反映了在心脏骤停期间使用现场护理超声的患病率较低或对其使用的消极态度。我们的目标是确定自我报告的患病率，态度,以及在重症监护病房心脏骤停期间使用即时超声的障碍。
方法：我们进行了为期3个月的网络调查（2022年8月8日-2022年11月6日），维多利亚州的重症监护病房顾问和注册服务商，澳大利亚。对Likert类型和自由文本答案进行了描述性和混合方法分析。
结果：反应率为91/398（22.8%），在顾问和注册商之间平均分配。有广泛的临床和超声经验。只有22.4％（22/91）的受访者报告在管理心脏骤停期间使用了75-100％的护理点超声。受访者在心脏骤停3（四分位范围：3-4）和“熟练操作员”4（（四分位范围；4-5）的情况下对他们在现场护理超声中的价值进行了评分5点量表。自由文本分析建议排除“填塞”（40/80[50%]评论）作为最有价值的用例，排除“技能”作为个人障碍（20/73[27.4%]评论）。个人和部门障碍的评价不高，尽管注册服务商认为“缺乏结构化的培训计划”是一个障碍。受访者在心脏骤停期间给予即时超声的价值是模棱两可的，但由熟练的操作员进行时，他们看到了更大的价值。
结论：据报道，在心脏骤停中很少使用护理点超声，主要是由于自我感知的技能和缺乏结构化的培训计划。
