The importance of training in echocardiography: a validation study using pocket echocardiography.

AIMS: To investigate the training effect in echocardiography by using recent hand-held ultrasound scanners (HANDs). METHODS: In this prospective study, 320 consecutive patients were scanned with HAND by an inexperienced ultrasonographer over a period of 8 weeks. Imaging studies were compared with high-end echocardiography as gold standard. Segmental endocardial border delineation was scored to describe image quality. Assessment of left ventricular dimensions, regional/global left ventricular function and grading of valve disease were compared. RESULTS: A significant reduction in examination duration, improvement in image quality, substantial agreement in functional assessment (κ > 0.61, P < 0.01) and wall motion scoring (κ=0.67, P < 0.01) could be observed over time. The correlation in left ventricular measurements was excellent (r > 0.98, P < 0.01). The detection of valve diseases and pericardial effusions was sufficient, but the grading only moderate (κ < 0.6). CONCLUSION: Well-grounded training in echocardiography leads to a rapid improvement in image acquisition and interpretation over a period of a few weeks. Basic diagnostic findings could be interpreted with high accuracy after short training. Interpretation of complex findings remained difficult. The time needed to carry out an examination using pocket echocardiography could not be reduced to less than 3-4 min per patient. New educational concepts are warranted.

Diagnostic performance of handheld echocardiography for the assessment of basic cardiac morphology and function: a validation study in routine cardiac patients.

AIMS: To investigate the intra- and interrater variability of expert users in the interpretation of handheld echocardiographic studies (HAND). METHODS: We scanned 320 consecutive patients with both HAND and high-end (HIGH) scanners. Images were interpreted independently by two blinded level III echocardiographers. Readings from the HIGH scanner served as the gold standard. Segmental endocardial-border delineation was scored to describe image quality. Assessment of left ventricular (LV) dimensions and regional/global LV function, and grading of valve disease were compared. RESULTS: We obtained correlations of r > 0.8 (P < 0.01) for intrarater variability for both expert readers when they analyzed HAND and HIGH images in relation to image quality, wall-motion abnormalities, and LV measurements. For intrarater variability of LVEF assessment, the correlations were at least moderate (r > 0.6, P < 0.01). Interrater variability for HIGH images was r = 0.9 (P < 0.01) for all parameters. Interrater variability for HAND images was less favorable for all parameters, but was at least moderate (r > 0.6, P < 0.01). All cases of pericardial effusion were detected. The agreement for the detection and grading of mitral and aortic regurgitation was at least moderate (κ > 0.6, P < 0.01). Detection of tricuspid regurgitation was less favorable, but only cases of mild regurgitation were missed. All cases of aortic stenosis were detected by both echocardiographers. CONCLUSIONS: In relation to the basic assessment of cardiac morphology and function, the interpretation by experienced echocardiographers of images obtained using handheld echocardiographic devices showed a moderate to very good correlation with standard echocardiography.