See the published version of this article at BMC Family Practice.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research article
Ultrasonography in assessing suspected bone fractures: a cross-sectional survey amongst German general practitioners
Gordian Lukas Schmid
Universitat Leipzig Medizinische Fakultat
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8238-3302
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
View the published version at BMC Family Practice.
Background: Over the last two decades, ultrasonography (US) has been shown to be an accurate tool for the diagnosis of suspected bone fractures; however, the integration of this application of US into routine care and outpatient settings needs to be explored. In this study, we surveyed German general practitioners (GPs) to assess their knowledge, attitudes, and utilization of US for the diagnosis of suspected fractures. Methods: Notification of the study, a self-designed questionnaire, and a reminder were mailed to 600 randomly selected GPs in Saxony and Saxony-Anhalt. Results: The response rate was 47.7% ( n = 286), and respondents did not differ from the population of all GPs in respect to sex and practice type. Among GPs surveyed, 48.6% used an US device in their practice. On average, GPs diagnosed six patients with suspected fractures per month, yet only 39.3% knew about the possibility of ultrasonographic fracture diagnosis, and only 4.3% of GPs using US applied it for this purpose. Among participants, 71.9% believed that US is inferior to conventional X-rays for the diagnosis of bony injuries. Users of US were better informed of and more commonly used US for fracture diagnosis compared to non-users. Conclusion: The need to rule out possible fractures frequently arises in general practice, and US devices are broadly available. Further efforts are needed to improve the knowledge and attitudes of GPs regarding the accuracy of US for fracture diagnosis. Multicenter controlled trials could explore the safety, usefulness, and effectiveness of this still seldom used diagnostic approach for suspected fractures.
Keywords
bone fracture, fracture diagnosis, ultrasonography, ultrasound imaging, point of care, general practice
Figure 1
Figure 2
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
Version 2
Posted 23 Dec, 2019
Published
On 13 Jan, 2020
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Accept
On 03 Jan, 2020
Editor assigned
On 30 Dec, 2019
Editor invited
On 29 Dec, 2019
Submission checks complete
On 20 Dec, 2019
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 20 Nov, 2019
Review #1 received
Received 19 Nov, 2019
Review #2 received
Received 16 Nov, 2019
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 11 Nov, 2019
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 06 Nov, 2019
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 27 Sep, 2019
Submission checks complete
On 18 Sep, 2019
Editor assigned
On 28 Aug, 2019
Editor invited
On 27 Aug, 2019
First submitted
On 26 Aug, 2019
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
General Practice
Learn more about our company.
This preprint is under consideration at BMC Family Practice. A preprint is a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research article
Ultrasonography in assessing suspected bone fractures: a cross-sectional survey amongst German general practitioners
Gordian Lukas Schmid
Universitat Leipzig Medizinische Fakultat
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8238-3302
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
Version 2
Posted 23 Dec, 2019
Published
On 13 Jan, 2020
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Accept
On 03 Jan, 2020
Editor assigned
On 30 Dec, 2019
Editor invited
On 29 Dec, 2019
Submission checks complete
On 20 Dec, 2019
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 20 Nov, 2019
Review #1 received
Received 19 Nov, 2019
Review #2 received
Received 16 Nov, 2019
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 11 Nov, 2019
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 06 Nov, 2019
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 27 Sep, 2019
Submission checks complete
On 18 Sep, 2019
Editor assigned
On 28 Aug, 2019
Editor invited
On 27 Aug, 2019
First submitted
On 26 Aug, 2019
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
General Practice
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
View the published version at BMC Family Practice.
Background: Over the last two decades, ultrasonography (US) has been shown to be an accurate tool for the diagnosis of suspected bone fractures; however, the integration of this application of US into routine care and outpatient settings needs to be explored. In this study, we surveyed German general practitioners (GPs) to assess their knowledge, attitudes, and utilization of US for the diagnosis of suspected fractures. Methods: Notification of the study, a self-designed questionnaire, and a reminder were mailed to 600 randomly selected GPs in Saxony and Saxony-Anhalt. Results: The response rate was 47.7% ( n = 286), and respondents did not differ from the population of all GPs in respect to sex and practice type. Among GPs surveyed, 48.6% used an US device in their practice. On average, GPs diagnosed six patients with suspected fractures per month, yet only 39.3% knew about the possibility of ultrasonographic fracture diagnosis, and only 4.3% of GPs using US applied it for this purpose. Among participants, 71.9% believed that US is inferior to conventional X-rays for the diagnosis of bony injuries. Users of US were better informed of and more commonly used US for fracture diagnosis compared to non-users. Conclusion: The need to rule out possible fractures frequently arises in general practice, and US devices are broadly available. Further efforts are needed to improve the knowledge and attitudes of GPs regarding the accuracy of US for fracture diagnosis. Multicenter controlled trials could explore the safety, usefulness, and effectiveness of this still seldom used diagnostic approach for suspected fractures.
Figure 1
Figure 2