Continuous independent quality control for fetal ultrasound biometry provided by the cumulative summation technique

Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 35, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 449-455

  Balsyte, D ^a   Schaffer L ^a   Burkhardt, T ^a   Wisser, J ^a   Zimmermann, R ^a   Kurmanavicius, J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Cumulative summation; Fetal biometry; Fetal weight estimation; Quality control of prenatal ultrasound; Z scores

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOMETRY; BIRTH WEIGHT; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; EVALUATION; FEMALE; FETUS DEVELOPMENT; FETUS ECHOGRAPHY; GESTATIONAL AGE; HUMAN; LEARNING; METHODOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; PREGNANCY; QUALITY CONTROL; REFERENCE VALUE; STANDARD;

BIOMETRY; BIRTH WEIGHT; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; FEMALE; FETAL DEVELOPMENT; GESTATIONAL AGE; HUMANS; LEARNING; PREGNANCY; QUALITY CONTROL; REFERENCE VALUES; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, PRENATAL;

EID: 77951002649     PISSN: 09607692     EISSN: 14690705     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/uog.7545     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Salomon LJ, Bernard JP, Ville Y. [Quality control of prenatal ultrasound. A role for biometry.] Gynecol Obstet Fertil 2006; 34: 683-691.
2. Platz E, Newman R. Diagnosis of IUGR: traditional biometry. Semin Perinatol 2008; 32: 140-147.
3. Scioscia M, Vimercati A, Ceci O, Vicino M, Selvaggi LE. Estimation of birth weight by two-dimensional ultrasonography: a critical appraisal of its accuracy. Obstet Gynecol 2008; 111: 57-65.
4. Dudley NJ, Chapman E. The importance of quality management in fetal measurement. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002; 19: 190-196.
5. Weerasinghe S, Mirghani H, Revel A, Abu-Zidan FM. Cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis in the assessment of trainecompetence in fetal biometry measurement. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2006; 28: 199-203.
6. 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.
7. Dudley NJ. A systematic review of the ultrasound estimation of fetal weight. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005; 25: 80-89.
8. Salomon LJ, Bernard JP, Ville Y. Analysis of Z-score distribution for the quality control of fetal ultrasound measurements at 20-24 weeks. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005; 26: 750-754.
9. Bowles TA, Watters DA. Time to CUSUM: simplified reporting of outcomes in colorectal surgery. ANZ J Surg 2007; 77: 587-591.
10. Naik VN, Devito I, Halpern SH. Cusum analysis is a useful tool to assess resident proficiency at insertion of labour epidurals. Can J Anaesth 2003; 50: 694-698.
11. Wolfe R, Bolsin S, Colson M, Stow P. Monitoring the rate of re-exploration for excessive bleeding after cardiac surgery in adults. Qual Saf Health Care 2007; 16: 192-196.
12. Yap CH, Colson ME, Watters DA. Cumulative sum techniques for surgeons: a brief review. ANZ J Surg 2007; 77: 583-586.
13. Bolsin S, Colson M. The use of the Cusum technique in the assessment of trainee competence in new procedures. Int J Qual Health Care 2000; 12: 433-438.
14. Williams SM, Parry BR, Schlup MM. Quality control: an application of the cusum. BMJ 1992; 304: 1359-1361.
15. Hadlock FP, Harrist RB, Sharman RS, Deter RL, Park SK. Estimation of fetal weight with the use of head, body, and femur measurements - a prospective study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985; 151: 333-337.
16. Campbell S, Thoms A. Ultrasound measurement of the fetal head to abdomen circumference ratio in the assessment of growth retardation. Br J ObstetGynaecol 1977; 84: 165-174.
17. Campbell S, Wilkin D. Ultrasonic measurement of fetal abdomen circumference in the estimation of fetal weight. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1975; 82: 689-697.
18. Biau DJ, Porcher R, Salomon LJ. CUSUM: a tool for ongoing assessment of performance. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008; 31: 252-255.
19. Parry BR. CUSUM: timely and trendy. ANZ J Surg 2007; 77: 523.
20. de Oliveira Filho GR. The construction of learning curves for basic skills in anesthetic procedures: an application for the cumulative sum method. Anesth Analg 2002; 95: 411-416.
21. Kurmanavicius J, Wright EM, Royston P, Wisser J, Huch R, Huch A, Zimmermann R. Fetal ultrasound biometry: 1. Head reference values. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999; 106: 126-135.
22. Kurmanavicius J, Wright EM, Royston P, Zimmermann R, Huch R, Huch A, Wisser J. Fetal ultrasound biometry: 2. Abdomen and femur length reference values. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999; 106: 136-143.
23. Sibanda T, Sibanda N. The CUSUM chart method as a tool for continuous monitoring of clinical outcomes using routinely collected data. BMC Med Res Methodol 2007; 7: 46.
24. Dresang LT, Rodney WM, Dees J. Teaching prenatal ultrasound to family medicine residents. FamMed 2004; 36: 98-107.
25. nd week of pregnancy.] Ultraschall Med 2006; 27: 185-187.
26. Predanic M, Cho A, Ingrid F, Pellettieri J. Ultrasonographic estimation of fetal weight: acquiring accuracy in residency. J Ultrasound Med 2002; 21: 495-500.
27. Kestin IG. A statistical approach to measuring the competence of anaesthetic trainees at practical procedures. Br J Anaesth 1995; 75: 805-809.
28. Hadlock FP, Harrist RB, Carpenter RJ, Deter RL, Park SK. Sonographic estimation of fetal weight. The value of femur length in addition to head and abdomen measurements. Radiology 1984; 150: 535-540.