Training in Obstetric Ultrasound Biometry: Results from a Multicenter Reproducibility Study.
fetal biometry
junior sonographer
obstetric ultrasound
reproducibility
senior sonographer
training program
Journal
Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine
ISSN: 1550-9613
Titre abrégé: J Ultrasound Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8211547
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2022
Nov 2022
Historique:
revised:
04
02
2022
received:
04
12
2021
accepted:
12
02
2022
pubmed:
19
3
2022
medline:
21
10
2022
entrez:
18
3
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To assess the intra- and interobserver reproducibility of fetal biometry measurements obtained by trainee (junior) and experienced sonographers (senior) in the contest of two training programs in obstetric ultrasound. This was a prospective study on 192 women recruited ensuring an even distribution throughout gestation (18-41 weeks), at University College London Hospital (UCLH), England (87 cases), and at Maternité Regionale Universitaire de Nancy (MRUN), France (105 cases). The training took place in two training centers with experience in ultrasound training and subspecialist training in fetal medicine. Measurements for head circumference (HC), abdominal circumference (AC), and femur length (FL) were obtained twice by junior and senior sonographers, blind to their own and each other's measurements. Differences between and within sonographers were expressed in millimeters and as a percentage of fetal dimensions. Reproducibility was assessed using Bland-Altman plots. Reproducibility was overall high with 95% confidence intervals (CI) within <6% for intraobserver and <8% for interobserver reproducibility. Intraobserver reproducibility was lower within junior than within senior sonographers' measurements for HC (95% CI: <4% versus <3%) and FL (95% CI: <6% and < 5%). Intraobserver reproducibility was similar between the two centers/training programs (AC 95% CI: <6%). Cumulative interobserver reproducibility in both centers was similar to the reproducibility within a single site (95% CI: <5%, <8%, and <7% for HC, AC, and FL, respectively). Reproducibility of fetal biometry measurement was high in centers with structured training programs regardless of sonographers' experience. Reproducibility was higher in sonographers who completed the training.
Types de publication
Multicenter Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2819-2825Informations de copyright
© 2022 American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.
Références
Salomon LJ, Alfirevic Z, Da Silva CF, et al. ISUOG practice guidelines: ultrasound assessment of fetal biometry and growth. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2019; 53:715-723.
Sarris I, Ioannou C, Dighe M, et al. Standardization of fetal ultrasound biometry measurements: improving the quality and consistency of measurements. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011; 38:681-687.
Salomon LJ, Bernard JP, Duyme M, Doris B, Mas N, Ville Y. Feasibility and reproducibility of an image-scoring method for quality control of fetal biometry in the second trimester. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2006; 27:34-40.
Donadono V, Cavallaro A, Roberts NW, Ioannou C, Papagerghiou AT, Napolitano R. A systematic review of methodology used in studies aimed at creating charts of fetal brain structures. Diagnostics 2021; 11:916.
Ioannou C, Talbot K, Ohuma E, et al. Systematic review of methodology used in ultrasound studies aimed at creating charts of fetal size. BJOG 2012; 119:425-439.
Perni SC, Chervenak FA, Kalish RB, et al. Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility of fetal biometry. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004; 24:654-658.
Ambroise Grandjean G, Berveiller P, Hossu G, Noble P, Chamagne M, Morel O. Prospective assessment of reproducibility of three-dimensional ultrasound for fetal biometry. Diagn Interv Imaging 2020; 101:481-487.
Ambroise Grandjean A, Bertholdt C, Zuily S, et al. Fetal biometry in ultrasound: a new approach to assess the long-term impact of simulation on learning patterns. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod 2021; 50:102135.
ISUOG Education Committee recommendations for basic training in obstetric and gynecological ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014; 43:113-116.
Wanyonyi SZ, Napolitano R, Ohuma EO, Salomon LJ, Papagerghiou AT. Image-scoring system for crown-rump length measurement. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014; 44:649-654.
Papageorghiou AT, Sarris I, Ioannou C, et al. Ultrasound methodology used to construct the fetal growth standards in the INTERGROWTH-21st Project. BJOG 2013; 120(Suppl 2):27-32.
Napolitano R, Donadono V, Ohuma EO, et al. Scientific basis for standardization of fetal head measurements by ultrasound: a reproducibility study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016; 48:80-85.
Molloholli M, Napolitano R, Ohuma EO, et al. Image-scoring system for umbilical and uterine artery pulsed-wave Doppler ultrasound measurement. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2019; 53:251-255.
Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1:307-310.
Bland JM, Altman DG. A note on the use of the intraclass correlation coefficient in the evaluation of agreement between two methods of measurement. Comput Biol Med 1990; 20:337-340.
Myles PS, Cui J. Using the Bland-Altman method to measure agreement with repeated measures. Br J Anaesth 2007; 99:309-311.
Dromey BP, Ahmed S, Vasconcelos F, et al. Dimensionless squared jerk: an objective differential to assess experienced and novice probe movement in obstetric ultrasound. Prenat Diagn 2021; 41:271-277.
Gkamprana AM, Despotidi A, Maroudias G, Michalitsi V, Papantoniou N, Pergialiotis V. Training the trainees: a pilot study of inter-observer discrepancy and learning curve in the maternal foetal unit of a tertiary centre. J Obstet Gynaecol 2021; 41:746-749.
Cavallaro A, Ash ST, Napolitano R, et al. Quality control of ultrasound for fetal biometry: results from the INTERGROWTH-21st Project. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2018; 52:332-339.