Prospective comparison of nine different handheld ultrasound (HHUS) devices by ultrasound experts with regard to B-scan quality, device handling and software in abdominal sonography

dc.contributor.authorMerkel, Daniel
dc.contributor.authorLueders, Christian
dc.contributor.authorSchneider, Christoph
dc.contributor.authorYousefzada, Masuod
dc.contributor.authorRuppert, Johannes
dc.contributor.authorWeimer, Andreas
dc.contributor.authorHerzog, Moritz
dc.contributor.authorLorenz, Liv Annebritt
dc.contributor.authorVieth, Thomas
dc.contributor.authorBuggenhagen, Holger
dc.contributor.authorWeinmann-Menke, Julia
dc.contributor.authorWeimer, Johannes Matthias
dc.date.accessioned2024-10-30T11:11:00Z
dc.date.available2024-10-30T11:11:00Z
dc.date.issued2024
dc.description.abstractThe HHUS market is very complex due to a multitude of equipment variants and several different device manufacturers. Only a few studies have compared different HHUS devices under clinical conditions. We conducted a comprehensive prospective observer study with a direct comparison of nine different HHUS devices in terms of B-scan quality, device handling, and software features under abdominal imaging conditions. Methods: Nine different HHUS devices (Butterfly iQ+, Clarius C3HD3, D5CL Microvue, Philips Lumify, SonoEye Chison, SonoSite iViz, Mindray TE Air, GE Vscan Air, and Youkey Q7) were used in a prospective setting by a total of 12 experienced examiners on the same subjects in each case and then assessed using a detailed questionnaire regarding B-scan quality, handling, and usability of the software. The evaluation was carried out using a point scale (5 points: very good; 1 point: insufficient). Results: In the overall evaluation, Vscan Air and SonoEye Chison achieved the best ratings. They achieved nominal ratings between “good” (4 points) and “very good” (5 points). Both devices differed significantly (p < 0.01) from the other seven devices tested. Among the HHUS devices, Clarius C3HD3 and Vscan Air achieved the best results for B-mode quality, D5CL Microvue achieved the best results for device handling, and SonoEye Chison and Vscan Air achieved the best results for software. Conclusions: This is the first comprehensive study to directly compare different HHUS devices in a head-to-head manner. While the majority of the tested devices demonstrated satisfactory performance, notable discrepancies were observed between them. In particular, the B-scan quality exhibited considerable variation, which may have implications for the clinical application of HHUS. The findings of this study can assist in the selection of an appropriate HHUS device for specific applications, considering the clinical objectives and acknowledging the inherent limitations.en_GB
dc.identifier.doihttp://doi.org/10.25358/openscience-10815
dc.identifier.urihttps://openscience.ub.uni-mainz.de/handle/20.500.12030/10834
dc.language.isoengde
dc.rightsCC-BY-4.0*
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/*
dc.subject.ddc610 Medizinde_DE
dc.subject.ddc610 Medical sciencesen_GB
dc.titleProspective comparison of nine different handheld ultrasound (HHUS) devices by ultrasound experts with regard to B-scan quality, device handling and software in abdominal sonographyen_GB
dc.typeZeitschriftenaufsatzde
jgu.journal.issue17de
jgu.journal.titleDiagnosticsde
jgu.journal.volume14de
jgu.organisation.departmentFB 04 Medizinde
jgu.organisation.nameJohannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz
jgu.organisation.number2700
jgu.organisation.placeMainz
jgu.organisation.rorhttps://ror.org/023b0x485
jgu.pages.alternative1913de
jgu.publisher.doi10.3390/diagnostics14171913de
jgu.publisher.issn2075-4418de
jgu.publisher.nameMDPIde
jgu.publisher.placeBaselde
jgu.publisher.year2024
jgu.rights.accessrightsopenAccess
jgu.subject.ddccode610de
jgu.subject.dfgLebenswissenschaftende
jgu.type.contenttypeScientific articlede
jgu.type.dinitypeArticleen_GB
jgu.type.resourceTextde
jgu.type.versionPublished versionde

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
prospective_comparison_of_nin-20241025200307807.pdf
Size:
3.59 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Weimer, Merkel et al. (2024) - Prospective Comparison of Nine Different Handheld Ultrasound (HHUS) Devices by Ultrasound Experts with Regard to B-Scan Quality, Device Handling and Software in Abdominal Sonography

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
3.57 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:

Collections