POCUS Courses Can Lead to Meaningful Difference in Application: Secondary Analysis From CUSP Survey

Monday, March 23, 2026

2:30 PM - 3:30 PM Central Time

Location: Connections Central - RST 12

JH

Justin Hessinger, MD

University of Illinois College of Medicine - Peoria

Disclosure(s): No relevant financial relationship(s) to disclose.
CO

Collins Odhiambo, PhD

Assistant Professor ( research)
UICOMP

Disclosure information not submitted.
Vidit Bhargava, MD

University of Alabama at Birmingham, Alabama

Disclosure(s): No relevant financial relationship(s) to disclose.
KB

Kaushik Bhowmick, MD

Physician
West Suffolk Hospital, Bury St Edmunds (UK

Disclosure information not submitted.
PD

Padmaraj Duvvuri, MD

Physician
Baptist Memorial Hospital

Disclosure information not submitted.
PG

Pramod Guru, MD

Consultant, Critical Care Medicine
Mayo Clinic Hospital in Florida

Disclosure information not submitted.
SK

Salah Keyrouz, MD

Physician
Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St Lou

Disclosure information not submitted.
SS

Sharmili Sinha, MD

Physician
Apollo Hospitals, Cuttack, Odisha, India

Disclosure information not submitted.
CW

Candice White, APN

APN
Doctorate of Nursing Practice, John's Hopkins University,

Disclosure information not submitted.
ST

Sandeep Tripathi, MD, MS, FCCM

N/A
University of Illinois College of Medicine - Peoria

Disclosure information not submitted.

Introduction: Post-training POCUS courses fulfill a skill development area for intensivists who did not receive POCUS training during fellowships. Prior surveys have shown increased comfort with POCUS among course participants. However, it is not known if participation in POCUS courses leads to an increase in POCUS utilization in practice. We conducted a survey of all SCCM members in 2024 on POCUS practices (Critical Ultrasound Penetration Survey, CUSP). The specific aim of this secondary analysis from the CUSP data was to compare the use of POCUS among survey respondents who had completed POCUS training courses vs. those who had not.

Methods: In the CUSP survey respondents were asked about the frequency with which they used POCUS for various procedural uses and the proportion of eligible patients on whom they had used POCUS within the last year (never, rarely [ < 25%], sometimes [26–50%], often [51–75%], and almost always [>76%]). For this analysis, the responses were dichotomized as use on the majority of eligible patients vs. not (>50%). Responses from participants who reported completing a post-training POCUS course were compared with those who did not.

Results: Out of 503 respondents, 256 with POCUS training in fellowships were excluded. Of the remaining 247 respondents (32 countries, 60% US), 149 (60%) reported having completed a post-training POCUS course, and 98 (40%) did not. There was no difference in POCUS use for vascular access between the two groups. Respondents who had taken POCUS courses were more likely to perform POCUS on >50% of eligible patients for indications such as LV function assessment (65% vs. 52%, p = 0.046), volume status (60% vs. 43%, p = 0.01), pericardial effusion (62% vs. 49%, p = 0.04), and pleural effusion (75% vs. 53%, p = 0.004). Overall use of POCUS was low (and did not show a difference with POCUS course) for applications not typically included in POCUS courses, such as pulmonary hypertension assessment (29% vs. 20%, p = 0.14), valvular dysfunction (31% vs. 24%, p = 0.25), or advanced pressure measurements (24% vs. 19%, p = 0.36).

Conclusions: Post-training POCUS courses lead to increased clinical application of POCUS at the bedside among intensivists who did not receive POCUS training during their fellowships.