article · Nigerian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences
This prospective comparative study evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography and clinical assessment in patients suspected of having an acute abdomen, using surgical and histopathological outcomes as the reference standard. Over a one-year period, 139 patients were assessed clinically and via ultrasound prior to surgical or conservative management. The findings confirmed that ultrasonography correctly diagnosed 91.4 percent of cases, compared to 74.1 percent correctly identified through clinical evaluation alone. Overall, ultrasonography demonstrated superior performance metrics, achieving 90.6 percent sensitivity, 91.8 percent specificity, and 91.4 percent overall accuracy. In contrast, clinical assessment yielded lower outcomes, with 78.5 percent sensitivity, 69.8 percent specificity, and 74.1 percent diagnostic accuracy. Because of its strong performance profile, affordability, and safety relative to alternative modalities, ultrasonography is highlighted as an effective and preferred diagnostic tool for investigating acute abdominal conditions in resource-constrained clinical settings.
Accurate and rapid assessment of severe abdominal conditions is critical to prevent complications and unnecessary surgeries. By demonstrating that ultrasound substantially outperforms standalone physical clinical evaluations, this research provides strong evidence for healthcare providers to prioritise ultrasound imaging. Its affordability and safety profile make it particularly vital for improving patient outcomes and standardising emergency diagnostic decisions in resource-limited clinical environments.
This research provides applied evidence directly supporting clinical adoption and standardisation of diagnostic protocols by healthcare providers and hospital management. While the study evaluates existing, widely available ultrasound technology rather than a novel commercial product, the findings can inform diagnostic service deployment and training programmes for emergency medical personnel. The application is ready for immediate operational use in hospital settings seeking cost-effective, high-performing diagnostic procedures.
AI-generated from the published abstract. Always read the original work before citing.
Ultrasonography has played remarkable roles in diagnosing the acute abdomen because of its high diagnostic accuracy, affordability, availability; and safety profile relative to other imaging modalities. This study sought to determine the diagnostic performance markers: sensitivities, specificities, and diagnostic accuracies for Clinical and Ultrasonographic diagnoses by comparing both with standard surgical/ Histopathological findings. This was a 1-year prospective comparative study on patients with clinical suspicion of acute abdomen who were evaluated clinically and with Ultrasonography before surgical or conservative treatment. The final diagnoses were established after surgery and histopathology. The data were analyzed using computer software- statistical package for social Sciences, SPSS statistics (IBM corporation, Chicago, IL, USA 2015) version 22. This study found final diagnoses were established in 139 patients through surgery and histology. Out of these, Ultrasonography correctly diagnosed 127 (91.4%) patients while Clinical evaluations were diagnostic in 103 (74.1%) patients. The overall diagnostic performance markers for Ultrasonography were significantly higher than those of clinical impression with sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic accuracy of 90.6%, 91.8%, 95.4%, 91.3%, and 91.4% respectively. The corresponding clinical diagnostic performance markers were: 78.5%, 69.8%, 72.3%, 76.3%, and 74.1% respectively. This study showed that Ultrasonography is a highly valuable imaging modality in the diagnostic evaluation of acute abdomen, and is recommended as a modality of choice in our environment.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.4314/njbas.v32i2.11
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.
