Evaluation of the LVivo Image Quality Scoring (IQS)
1 other identifier
observational
164
1 country
1
Brief Summary
The study includes two parts: Part 1:
- 100 examinations of patient referred for echo evaluation, containing clips that were acquired from the 4CH apical view were collected retrospectively. Each study includes 10 clips that represent typical user scanning errors
- Offline evaluation of the system (by batch processing) shall be performed by comparing the system output to preliminary quality tagging by experienced sonographers Part 2:
- Live scans of apical 4CH clips of patients with indication for POCUS examination will be performed by POC physicians
- LVivo IQS shall be used (on Lumify) during the scan for patients that meet inclusion criteria until 50 exams will be collected. 3 sec of each scan shall be saved, and Image quality score (IQS) shall be documented
- Saved scans shall be reviewed by an expert physician to determine whether they are clinically interpretable
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P50-P75 for all trials
Started Sep 2022
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
September 5, 2022
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
September 13, 2022
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
September 13, 2022
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
September 22, 2022
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
October 3, 2022
CompletedOctober 3, 2022
September 1, 2022
8 days
September 22, 2022
September 28, 2022
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (3)
Part 1: Overall agreement of 75% between image quality classification by LVivo IQS and the data tagging by experienced sonographers
Up to 24 weeks
Part 2: 80% of the Exams with image quality 3-5 by visual estimation, received at least "Medium" image quality by LVivo IQS
Up to 24 weeks
Part 2: 90% of these cases (when at least "Medium" image quality is indicated by LVivo IQS) are clinically interpretable
Up to 24 weeks
Eligibility Criteria
Part 1 Patients age ≥18 referred for echo evaluation Part 2 Patients age ≥18 with indication for POCUS examination
You may qualify if:
- Part 1 Study:
- Age ≥18
- Referred to routine Echo examination
- Part 2 Study:
- Age ≥18
- Indication for POCUS
You may not qualify if:
- Part 1 Study:
- Part 2 Study:
- Image quality 1-2 according to ACEP June 2018 \[11\]
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Soroka university medical center
Beersheba, Israel
Related Publications (13)
Johri AM, Galen B, Kirkpatrick JN, Lanspa M, Mulvagh S, Thamman R. ASE Statement on Point-of-Care Ultrasound during the 2019 Novel Coronavirus Pandemic. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2020 Jun;33(6):670-673. doi: 10.1016/j.echo.2020.04.017. Epub 2020 Apr 15.
PMID: 32503704BACKGROUNDHashim A, Tahir MJ, Ullah I, Asghar MS, Siddiqi H, Yousaf Z. The utility of point of care ultrasonography (POCUS). Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2021 Nov 2;71:102982. doi: 10.1016/j.amsu.2021.102982. eCollection 2021 Nov. No abstract available.
PMID: 34840746BACKGROUNDDall T. et al. The Complexities of Physician Supply and Demand: Projections From 2019 to 2034. Association Of American Medical Collage, 2021.
BACKGROUNDBlanco P, Volpicelli G. Common pitfalls in point-of-care ultrasound: a practical guide for emergency and critical care physicians. Crit Ultrasound J. 2016 Dec;8(1):15. doi: 10.1186/s13089-016-0052-x. Epub 2016 Oct 26.
PMID: 27783380BACKGROUNDSmistad E, Ostvik A, Salte IM, Melichova D, Nguyen TM, Haugaa K, Brunvand H, Edvardsen T, Leclerc S, Bernard O, Grenne B, Lovstakken L. Real-Time Automatic Ejection Fraction and Foreshortening Detection Using Deep Learning. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control. 2020 Dec;67(12):2595-2604. doi: 10.1109/TUFFC.2020.2981037. Epub 2020 Nov 24.
PMID: 32175861BACKGROUNDUnlu S, Duchenne J, Mirea O, Pagourelias ED, Bezy S, Cvijic M, Beela AS, Thomas JD, Badano LP, Voigt JU; EACVI-ASE Industry Standardization Task Force. Impact of apical foreshortening on deformation measurements: a report from the EACVI-ASE Strain Standardization Task Force. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020 Mar 1;21(3):337-343. doi: 10.1093/ehjci/jez189.
PMID: 31361311BACKGROUNDKumar V. There is No Substitute for Human Intelligence. Indian J Crit Care Med. 2021 May;25(5):486-488. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23832.
PMID: 34177163BACKGROUNDNarang A, Bae R, Hong H, Thomas Y, Surette S, Cadieu C, Chaudhry A, Martin RP, McCarthy PM, Rubenson DS, Goldstein S, Little SH, Lang RM, Weissman NJ, Thomas JD. Utility of a Deep-Learning Algorithm to Guide Novices to Acquire Echocardiograms for Limited Diagnostic Use. JAMA Cardiol. 2021 Jun 1;6(6):624-632. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2021.0185.
PMID: 33599681BACKGROUNDLiu B.R et al. Emergency Ultrasound Standard Reporting Guidelines. ACEP, 2018. pp. 2-44.
BACKGROUNDDixon, W.J., Massey, F.J. Introduction to Statistical Analysis. 4th Edition McGraw-Hill, 1983. pp. 105-107
BACKGROUNDNagata Y, Kado Y, Onoue T, Otani K, Nakazono A, Otsuji Y, Takeuchi M. Impact of image quality on reliability of the measurements of left ventricular systolic function and global longitudinal strain in 2D echocardiography. Echo Res Pract. 2018 Mar;5(1):27-39. doi: 10.1530/ERP-17-0047. Epub 2018 Feb 5.
PMID: 29432198BACKGROUNDRussell FM, Herbert A, Ferre RM, Zakeri B, Echeverria V, Peterson D, Wallach P. Development and implementation of a point of care ultrasound curriculum at a multi-site institution. Ultrasound J. 2021 Feb 21;13(1):9. doi: 10.1186/s13089-021-00214-w.
PMID: 33615390BACKGROUNDGoldman, L. et al. Echocardiography. Elsevier, Inc, 2020. pp. 253-260
BACKGROUND
Related Links
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Design
- Study Type
- observational
- Observational Model
- OTHER
- Time Perspective
- PROSPECTIVE
- Sponsor Type
- INDUSTRY
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
September 22, 2022
First Posted
October 3, 2022
Study Start
September 5, 2022
Primary Completion
September 13, 2022
Study Completion
September 13, 2022
Last Updated
October 3, 2022
Record last verified: 2022-09
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will not share