Background Preterm birth is the leading cause of death in children under the age of five years. Transvaginal cervical length (TVCL) assessment can be used to predict preterm delivery risk at the mid‐trimester scan. To optimise the screening tool, developing and maintaining quality standards is important. Aims To develop an Australian reference range for TVCL at 18.0–21.0 weeks’ gestation, quality standards for measurement and audit mechanisms for ultrasound operators. Materials and Methods A retrospective audit was performed of consecutive patients scanned at 18.0–21.0 weeks’ gestation. Each TVCL measurement ultrasound image was reviewed, and exclusions were made based on a defined set of quality criteria. Fractional polynomial Bayesian methodology was used to establish a reference range. Central tendency, dispersion plots and cumulative sum charts for operators in the original reference range cohort were created. These plots were then applied to a second validation cohort of operators to establish the efficacy of this quality assurance audit tool. Results Median TVCL from 1031 participants was 36.0 mm (interquartile range 32.7–40.0 mm), which was independent of gestational age. The quality audit tool was applied to 15 operators from the reference cohort with a mean cervix length multiple of the median of 1.01 and a mean SD log10 cervix length multiple of the median of 0.06. Of the 22 operators in the validation cohort, 20 (90.9%) demonstrated ideal or acceptable central tendency results, and 19 (86.4%) remained in the appropriate cumulative sum zone. Conclusion An Australian cervix length measurement reference range at 18.0–21.0 weeks’ gestation has been developed along with a validated quality assurance audit tool for ultrasound operators.
Introduction: Ultrasound estimated fetal weight (EFW) is a vital part of prenatal care.We aimed to determine the accuracy of sonographic EFW at a regional Australian hospital, explore factors associated with EFW accuracy and review accuracy calculation methods.Methods: Ultrasound EFW (Hadlock C) was calculated within one week of a live delivery, for 357 singleton pregnancies. EFW accuracy, the difference between EFW, and live birthweight (LBW), were quantified using percentage error (PE); absolute error (AE); 'signed' error and AE ≤10% of LBW.Results: Estimations of accuracy varied by calculation method, with PE smaller (mean 2.3% [CI 1.5, 3.1], median PE 2.4% [IQR À3.4, 6.7]) than AE (mean 6.4% [CI 5.9, 6.9], median AE 5.1% [IQR 2.7, 9.0]). Signed error indicated the majority of EFWs were overestimates and 80.1% of EFW calculations had an AE within 10% of LBW. EFW inaccuracy (AE ≥10% of LBW) varied between sonographers (p = .023) and scan to delivery interval (p = .003).Conclusions: EFW accuracy rates at the regional hospital were similar to published error rates. EFW accuracy varied with sonographer and with time from scan to delivery. Absolute error provides more useful and comparable information than percentage error of EFW.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.