Objectives: Since 2007 the second-trimester fetal anomaly scan is offered to all pregnant women as part of the national prenatal screening program in the Netherlands. Dutch population-based screening programs generally have a well-described system to achieve quality assurance. Because of the absence of a uniform system to monitor the actual performance of the fetal anomaly scan in 2012, we developed a standardized image-scoring method. The aim of this study was to evaluate the scanning performance of all sonographers in the southwestern region of the Netherlands using this image-scoring method. Methods: Each sonographer was requested to set up a digital portfolio. A portfolio consists of five logbooks from five different pregnant women, each containing 25 fetal anatomical structures and six biometric measures of randomly selected fetal anomaly scans. Results: During the study period, 425 logbooks of 85 sonographers were assessed as part of the audit process. Seventy-three out of 85 sonographers (86%) met the criteria in the primary audit, and 12 sonographers required individual hands-on training. A successful assessment was achieved for 11 sonographers in the re-audit and one sonographer ceased her contract. Moreover, 2.1% of the required images were not digitally stored and therefore could not be reviewed. Conclusions: Quality assessment using the image-scoring method demonstrated that most of the sonographers met the expectations of the audit process, but those who had subpar performance met the expectations after retraining.

Additional Metadata
Keywords audit, fetal anomaly scan, quality assessment, training, ultrasound
Persistent URL dx.doi.org/10.7863/ultra.16.06055, hdl.handle.net/1765/103290
Journal Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine
Ursem, N.T.C, Peters, I.A, Kraan-Van Der Est, M.N. (Mieke N.), Reijerink-Verheij, J.C.I.Y, Knapen, M.F.C.M, & Cohen-Overbeek, T.E. (Titia E.). (2017). An Audit of Second-Trimester Fetal Anomaly Scans Based on a Novel Image-Scoring Method in the Southwest Region of the Netherlands:. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine, 36(6), 1171–1179. doi:10.7863/ultra.16.06055