Table 2.
Efficacy of handheld ultrasound in patients with COVID-19 compared with standard echocardiography
| Handheld echocardiography (n = 90) | Standard echocardiography (n = 90) | 95% CI or χ2 | P | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, y | 67 ± 14 | 63 ± 15 | .15 | |
| Sex, male | 64 | 64 | 0 | |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 32 ± 10 | |||
| Adequate for indication | 98 | 99 | ||
| Study time, min | 5.4 ± 1.9 | 24 ± 6.8 | −35 to −38 | <.00001 |
| WM interpreted | 85 | 78 | 2.1 | .34 |
| MR interpreted | 93 | 100 | ∗ | .012 |
| PE interpreted | 100 | 98 | ∗ | 1.00 |
| FU studies required (inadequately imaged) | 0 | 0 | ||
| FU studies ordered for reevaluation | 13 | 20 | ∗ | .77 |
BMI, Body mass indexed; FU, follow-up; MR, mitral regurgitation; PE, pericardial effusion; WM, wall motion.
Data are expressed as mean ± SD or as percentages.
Fisher exact test.