2026-08-29T14:12:21Zhttps://repisalud.isciii.es/rest/oai/request

oai:repisalud.isciii.es:20.500.12105/226702024-11-28T20:36:38Zcom_20.500.12105_15322com_20.500.12105_2051col_20.500.12105_16967

00925njm 22002777a 4500 dc Andersen, Camilla Aakjaer author Jensen, Martin Bach B author Toftegaard, Berit Skjodeberg author Vedsted, Peter author Harris, Michael author Aubin-Auger, Isabelle author Azuri, Joseph author Brekke, Matte author Buczkowski, Krzysztof author Buono, Nicola author Costiug, Emiliana author Dinant, Geert-Jan author Esteva Cantó, Magdalena author Foreva, Gergana author Babic, Svjetlana Gasparovic author Hoffman, Robert author Jakob, Eva author Koskela, Tuomas author Marzo-Castillejo, Merce author Murchie, Peter author Neves, Ana Luisa author Petek, Davorina author Ster, Marija Petek author Sawicka-Powierza, Jolanta author Schneider, Antonius author Smyrnakis, Emmanouil author Streit, Sven author Thulesius, Hans author Weltermann, Birgitta author Orenas Res Grp author 2019-09 Objective: The overall objective of this study was to examine the differences in ultrasound availability in primary care across Europe. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting Primary care. Participants Primary care physicians (PCPs). Primary and secondary outcomes measures The primary aim was to describe the variation in in-house primary care ultrasonography availability across Europe using descriptive statistics. The secondary aim was to explore associations between in-house ultrasonography availability and the characteristics of PCPs and their clinics using a mixed-effects logistic regression model. Results We collected data from 20 European countries. A total of 2086 PCPs participated, varying from 59 to 446 PCPs per country. The median response rate per country was 24.8%. The median (minimum-maximum) percentage of PCPs across Europe with access to in-house abdominal ultrasonography was 15.3% (0.0%-98.1%) and 12.1% (0.0%-30.8%) had access to in-house pelvic ultrasonography with large variations between countries. We found associations between in-house abdominal ultrasonography availability and larger clinics (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.2 to 4.9) and clinics with medical doctors specialised in areas, which traditionally use ultrasonography (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.1 to 3.8). Corresponding associations were found between in-house pelvic ultrasonography availability and larger clinics (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.3 to 2.7) and clinics with medical doctors specialised in areas, which traditionally use ultrasonography (OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.8 to 5.1). Additionally, we found a negative association between urban clinics and in-house pelvic ultrasound availability (OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 0.9). Conclusions: Across Europe, there is a large variation in PCPs' access to in-house ultrasonography and organisational aspects of primary care seem to determine this variation. If evidence continues to support ultrasonography as a front-line point-of-care test, implementation strategies for increasing its availability in primary care are needed. Future research should focus on facilitators and barriers that may affect the implementation process. Andersen CA, Bach B Jensen M, Toftegaard BS, Vedsted P, Harris M, Aubin-Auger I, et al. Primary care physicians' access to in-house ultrasound examinations across Europe: a questionnaire study. BMJ Open. 2019 Sep;9(9):e030958. 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030958 2044-6055 BMJ Open http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13003/17143 31575576 L629500311 2-s2.0-85072848427 https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12105/22670 497787600329 Organisation of health services Primary care Diagnostic radiology Ultrasound Primary care physicians' access to in-house ultrasound examinations across Europe: a questionnaire study