Trust your gut? Evaluating non-expert gastric ultrasound performance – A prospective observational cohort study
Authors' conclusion
Examiners with limited experience in ultrasound diagnostics may accurately identify a full stomach in normal-weight volunteers after a standardized training sequence.
Study context
- Population
- Healthy, non-obese volunteers randomised to "fasted", "non-fasted, fluid" or "non-fasted, solid"
- Participants
- 80 examinations
- Exposure
- Inexperienced examiners vs Expert
- Inexperienced examinersn = 5
- Outcome
- Accuracy of identifying fasting status by gastric ultrasound performed by inexperienced examiners
Methodological detailsexaminers blinded to fasting status, volunteers randomised 2:1:1 to fasting states
- Examiners blinded to fasting status
- Volunteers randomised 2:1:1 to fasting states
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Accuracy of identifying fasting status by gastric ultrasound
| Group | Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV | Fasted volunteers wrongly classified as non-fasted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inexperienced examiners | 1.00 (95 % CI: 0.91-1.00) | 0.55 (95 % CI: 0.40-0.69) | 0.69 (95 % CI: 0.56-0.79) | 1.00 (95 % CI: 0.85-1.00) | 18 of 40 |
Inexperienced examiners
Sensitivity1.00 (95 % CI: 0.91-1.00)
Specificity0.55 (95 % CI: 0.40-0.69)
PPV0.69 (95 % CI: 0.56-0.79)
NPV1.00 (95 % CI: 0.85-1.00)
Fasted volunteers wrongly classified as non-fasted18 of 40
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
Interrater reliability of gastric cross-sectional area, expert vs non-experts (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC))
- Overall ICC
- 0.72 (95 % CI 0.57-0.82)
- ICC, "fasted"
- 0.30 (95 % CI −0.32-0.63)
- ICC, "non-fasted, fluid"
- 0.66 (95 % CI −0.16-0.87)
- ICC, "non-fasted, solid"
- 0.27 (95 % CI −0.82-0.71)
Original publication
Trust your gut? Evaluating non-expert gastric ultrasound performance – A prospective observational cohort study. J Clin Anesth. Published 10 November 2025. doi:10. 1016/ j. jclinane. 2025. 112053
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →