{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,18]],"date-time":"2026-09-18T17:58:20Z","timestamp":1789754300033,"version":"4.0.1"},"reference-count":10,"publisher":"CSIRO Publishing","issue":"4","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2025,5,21]],"date-time":"2025-05-21T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1747785600000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":2357,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by-nc-nd\/4.0\/"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":[],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2018,12,19]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>ABSTRACT<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>INTRODUCTION<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) of the kidney and bladder are among the most commonly performed POCUS scans in rural New Zealand (NZ).<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>AIM<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>To determine the quality, safety and effect on patient care of POCUS of the kidney and bladder in rural NZ.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>METHODS<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Overall, 28 doctors in six NZ rural hospitals completed a questionnaire both before and after undertaking a POCUS scan over a 9-month period. The clinical records and saved ultrasound images were reviewed by a specialist panel.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>RESULTS<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>The 28 participating doctors undertook 138 kidney and 60 bladder scans during the study. POCUS of the bladder as a test for urinary retention had a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI 88\u2013100) and specificity of 100% (95% CI 93\u2013100). POCUS of the kidney as a test for hydronephrosis had a sensitivity 90% (95% CI 74\u201396) and specificity of 96% (95% CI 89\u201398). The accuracy of other findings such as renal stones and bladder clot was lower. POCUS of the bladder appeared to have made a positive contribution to patient care in 92% of cases without evidence of harm. POCUS of the kidney benefited 93% of cases, although in three cases (2%), it may have had a negative effect on patient care.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>DISCUSSION<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>POCUS as a test for urinary retention and hydronephrosis in the hands of rural doctors was technically straightforward, improved diagnostic certainty, increased discharges and overall had a positive effect on patient care.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1071\/hc18034","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2018,12,19]],"date-time":"2018-12-19T00:15:26Z","timestamp":1545178526000},"page":"324-330","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":15,"title":["Rural point-of-care ultrasound of the kidney and bladder: quality and effect on patient management"],"prefix":"10.1071","volume":"10","author":[{"given":"Garry","family":"Nixon","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"ADunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago Dunedin, New Zealand"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Katharina","family":"Blattner","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"ADunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago Dunedin, New Zealand"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Jill","family":"Muirhead","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"ADunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago Dunedin, New Zealand"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Ngaire","family":"Kerse","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"BSchool of Population Health, University of Auckland, Tamaki, Auckland, New Zealand"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"67","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2018,12,7]]},"reference":[{"issue":"3","key":"2025111813470027600_R1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"224","DOI":"10.1071\/HC18031","article-title":"The scope of point-of-care ultrasound practice in rural New Zealand.","volume":"10","author":"Nixon","year":"2018","journal-title":"J Prim Health Care."},{"issue":"1","key":"2025111813470027600_R2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"3","DOI":"10.1136\/emermed-2012-201375","article-title":"Bedside ultrasound and the assessment of renal colic: a review.","volume":"30","author":"Dalziel","year":"2013","journal-title":"Emerg Med J."},{"issue":"4","key":"2025111813470027600_R3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"53","DOI":"10.1097\/01.NME.0000415016.88696.9d","article-title":"To scan or not to scan? Detecting urinary retention.","volume":"10","author":"Davis","year":"2012","journal-title":"Nursing Made Incredibly Easy."},{"issue":"2","key":"2025111813470027600_R4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"222","DOI":"10.1016\/j.healthpol.2014.05.002","article-title":"Geographic disparities in the utilisation of computed tomography scanning services in southern New Zealand.","volume":"118","author":"Nixon","year":"2014","journal-title":"Health Policy."},{"key":"2025111813470027600_R5"},{"issue":"5","key":"2025111813470027600_R6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e27","DOI":"10.1016\/j.annemergmed.2016.08.457","article-title":"Ultrasound Guidelines: Emergency, Point-of-Care and clinical ultrasound guidelines in medicine.","volume":"69","author":"American College of Emergency Physicians","year":"2017","journal-title":"Ann Emerg Med."},{"issue":"5","key":"2025111813470027600_R7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"342","DOI":"10.1111\/ajr.12472","article-title":"Point-of-care ultrasound in rural New Zealand: safety, quality and impact on patient management.","volume":"26","author":"Nixon","year":"2018","journal-title":"Aust J Rural Health."},{"key":"2025111813470027600_R8","unstructured":"MEDCALC\u00ae\n          . 2018Easy-to-use statistical software. Ostend: Belgium; 2018 [cited 2018 October 26]. Available from: https:\/\/www.medcalc.org\/calc\/diagnostic_test.php"},{"issue":"9","key":"2025111813470027600_R9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1300","DOI":"10.1053\/apmr.2002.34287","article-title":"The accuracy of clinical assessment of bladder volume.","volume":"83","author":"Weatherall","year":"2002","journal-title":"Arch Phys Med Rehabil."},{"issue":"3","key":"2025111813470027600_R10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"177","DOI":"10.1080\/003655902320131839","article-title":"Urinary bladder volume measurements: comparison of three ultrasound calculation methods.","volume":"36","author":"Hvarness","year":"2002","journal-title":"Scand J Urol Nephrol."}],"container-title":["The Journal of Primary Health Care"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/connectsci.au\/hc\/article-pdf\/10\/4\/324\/222639\/hc18034.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"syndication"},{"URL":"https:\/\/connectsci.au\/hc\/article-pdf\/10\/4\/324\/222639\/hc18034.pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,11,18]],"date-time":"2025-11-18T18:47:10Z","timestamp":1763491630000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/connectsci.au\/hc\/article\/10\/4\/324\/34910\/Rural-point-of-care-ultrasound-of-the-kidney-and"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2018,12,7]]},"references-count":10,"journal-issue":{"issue":"4","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2018,12,7]]},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2018,12,19]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1071\/hc18034","relation":{},"ISSN":["1172-6156"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1172-6156","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2018,12,7]]}}}