Online audit and feedback improve fetal second-trimester four-chamber view images: a randomised controlled trial

Agreement between antenatal gestational age by ultrasound and clinical records at birth: A prospective cohort in the Brazilian Amazon

This study aimed to assess agreement between antenatal estimates of gestational age by ultrasound and clinical records at birth in the Brazilian Amazon. Ultrasound examinations were scheduled during the second trimester for 578 pregnant women prospectively screened at primary health care units, following a standardized protocol for image quality control. A multistage algorithm was used to assess the best estimate of gestational age during the antenatal period, considering reliability of last menstrual period (LMP) and acceptable differences in relation to ultrasound estimates derived from fetal biparietal diameter and femur length. Agreement of antenatal estimates of gestational age confirmed by ultrasound and clinical records at birth was analyzed with Bland-Altman plots and kappa coefficients (preterm and postterm births). Overall, ultrasound examinations presented high quality (>90% of satisfactory images), and were adopted as the best estimate of gestational age among 83.4% of pregnant women, confirming reliable LMP in the remaining proportion. On average, difference in gestational age between antenatal estimates and clinical records was 0.43 week (95% CI: 0.32, 0.53). Classification of preterm births had a good agreement (kappa: 0.82, p<0.001), but a poor performance was observed for postterm births (kappa: -0.06, p = 0.92). Higher differences in gestational age were noted for participants with >11 years of education and cases of caesarean deliveries. In conclusion, high-quality ultrasound images from the second trimester of pregnancy based the assessment of gestational age, while reliability of LMP was limited. Information from clinical records at birth presented an acceptable agreement on average and for classification of preterm births, which is relevant for properly interpreting perinatal outcomes. Discrepancies in caesarean deliveries may warrant further investigation.

Physician Barriers and Facilitators for Screening for Congenital Heart Disease With Routine Obstetric Ultrasound: A National United States Survey

OBJECTIVES

Prenatal detection of congenital heart disease with obstetric screening remains at less than 50% in most population studies, far from what is thought to be achievable. We sought to identify barriers/facilitators for screening from the perspective of interpreting physicians and to understand how these barriers/facilitators may be associated with interpretation of screening images.

METHODS

Our mixed-methods studies included 4 focus groups in centers across the United States with obstetric, maternal-fetal medicine, and radiology providers who interpreted obstetric ultrasound studies. Themes around barriers/facilitators for fetal heart screening were coded from transcripts. A national Web-based survey was then conducted, which quantitatively measured reported barriers/facilitators and measured physicians' ability to interpret fetal heart-screening images. Multivariable generalized linear random-effect models assessed the association between barriers/facilitators and the accuracy of image interpretation at the image level.

RESULTS

Three main themes were identified in the focus groups: intrinsic barriers (ie, comfort with screening), external barriers (ie, lack of feedback), and organizational barriers (ie, study volumes). Among 190 physician respondents, 104 interpreted ultrasound studies. Perceptions of barriers varied by practice setting, with nontertiary providers having lower self-efficacy and perceived usefulness of cardiac screening. Facilitators associated with the odds of accurate interpretation of screening images were knowledge (odds ratio, 2.54; P = .002) and the volume of scans per week (odds ratio, 1.01 for every additional scan; P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

Some of the main barriers to cardiac screening identified and prioritized by physicians across the United States were knowledge of screening and minimal volumes of scans. Targeting these barriers will aid in improving prenatal detection of congenital heart disease.

Barriers to Sonographer Screening for Fetal Heart Defects: A U.S. National Survey

OBJECTIVE

We surveyed obstetric sonographers, who are at the forefront of the screening process to determine how barriers to prenatal cardiac screening impacted screening abilities.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional national survey of obstetric sonographers in the United States using a sampling frame from American Registry of Diagnostic Medical Sonography mailing lists. The web survey measured the ability to obtain and interpret fetal heart images. Several cognitive, sociodemographic, and system-level factors were measured, including intention to perform cardiac imaging. Regression and mediation analyses determined factors associated with intention to perform and ability to obtain and interpret cardiac images. Subgroup analyses of sonographers in tertiary versus nontertiary centers were also performed.

RESULTS

Survey response rate either due to noncontact or nonresponse was 40%. Of 480 eligible sonographers, ~30% practiced in tertiary settings. Sonographers had lower intention to perform outflow views compared to 4 chambers. Higher self-efficacy and professional expectations predicted higher odds of intention to perform outflow views (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.9-4.2 and 1.9, 95% CI 1.1-3.0, respectively). Overall accuracy of image interpretation was 65% (±14%). For the overall cohort and nontertiary subgroup, higher intention to perform outflows was associated with increased accuracy in overall image interpretation. For the tertiary subgroup, self-efficacy and feedback were strongly associated with accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified several modifiable (some heretofore unrecognized) targets to improve prenatal cardiac screening. Priorities identified by sonographers that are associated with screening success should guide future interventions.

Quality-improvement program for ultrasound-based fetal anatomy screening using large-scale clinical audit

OBJECTIVE

A large-scale audit and peer review of ultrasound images may improve sonographer performance, but is rarely performed consistently as it is time-consuming and expensive. The aim of this study was to perform a large-scale audit of routine fetal anatomy scans to assess if a full clinical audit cycle can improve clinical image-acquisition standards.

METHODS

A large-scale, clinical, retrospective audit was conducted of ultrasound images obtained during all routine anomaly scans performed from 18 + 0 to 22 + 6 weeks' gestation at a UK hospital during 2013 (Cycle 1), to build a baseline understanding of the performance of sonographers. Targeted actions were undertaken in response to the findings with the aim of improving departmental performance. A second full-year audit was then performed of fetal anatomy ultrasound images obtained during the following year (Cycle 2). An independent pool of experienced sonographers used an online tool to assess all scans in terms of two parameters: scan completeness (i.e. were all images archived?) and image quality using objective scoring (i.e. were images of high quality?). Both were assessed in each audit at the departmental level and at the individual sonographer level. A random sample of 10% of scans was used to assess interobserver reproducibility.

RESULTS

In Cycle 1 of the audit, 103 501 ultrasound images from 6257 anomaly examinations performed by 22 sonographers were assessed; in Cycle 2, 153 557 images from 6406 scans performed by 25 sonographers were evaluated. The analysis was performed including the images obtained by the 20 sonographers who participated in both cycles. Departmental median scan completeness improved from 72% in the first year to 78% at the second assessment (P < 0.001); median image-quality score for all fetal views improved from 0.83 to 0.86 (P < 0.001). The improvement was greatest for those sonographers who performed poorest in the first audit; with regards to scan completeness, the poorest performing 15% of sonographers in Cycle 1 improved by more than 30 percentage points, and with regards to image quality, the poorest performing 11% in Cycle 1 showed a more than 10% improvement. Interobserver repeatability of scan completeness and image-quality scores across different fetal views were similar to those in the published literature.

CONCLUSIONS

A clinical audit and a set of targeted actions helped improve sonographer scan-acquisition completeness and scan quality. Such adherence to recommended clinical acquisition standards may increase the likelihood of correct measurement and thereby fetal growth assessment, and should allow better detection of abnormalities. As such a large-scale audit is time consuming, further advantages would be achieved if this process could be automated. © 2018 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Quality control of ultrasound for fetal biometry: results from the INTERGROWTH-21st Project

OBJECTIVE

To assess a comprehensive package of ultrasound quality control in the Fetal Growth Longitudinal Study of the INTERGROWTH-21^st Project, a large multicenter study of fetal growth.

METHODS

Quality control (QC) measures were performed for 20 313 ultrasound scan images obtained prospectively from 4321 fetuses at 14-41 weeks' gestation in eight geographical locations. At the time of each ultrasound examination, three fetal biometric variables (head circumference (HC), abdominal circumference (AC) and femur length (FL)) were measured in triplicate on separately generated images. All measurements were taken in a blinded fashion. QC had two elements: (1) qualitative QC: visual assessment by sonographers at each study site of their images based on specific criteria, with 10% of images being re-assessed at the Oxford-based Ultrasound Quality Unit (compared using an adjusted kappa statistic); and (2) quantitative QC: assessment of measurement data by comparing the first, second and third measurements (intraobserver variability), remeasurement of caliper replacement in 10% (interobserver variability), both by Bland-Altman plots and plotting frequency histograms of the SD of triplicate measurements and assessing how many were above or below 2 SD of the expected distribution. The system allowed the sonographers' performances to be monitored regularly.

RESULTS

A high level of agreement between self- and external scoring was demonstrated for all measurements (κ = 0.99 (95% CI, 0.98-0.99) for HC, 0.98 (95% CI, 0.97-0.99) for AC and 0.96 (95% CI, 0.95-0.98) for FL). Intraobserver 95% limits of agreement (LoA) of ultrasound measures for HC, AC and FL were ± 3.3%, ± 5.6% and ± 6.2%, respectively; the corresponding values for interobserver LoA were ± 4.4%, ± 6.0% and ± 5.6%. The SD distribution of triplicate measurements for all biometric variables showed excessive variability for three of 31 sonographers, allowing prompt identification and retraining.

CONCLUSIONS

Qualitative and quantitative QC monitoring was feasible and highly reproducible in a large multicenter research study, which facilitated the production of high-quality ultrasound images. We recommend that the QC system we developed is implemented in future research studies and clinical practice. Copyright © 2017 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.