Karen Brage , Kristina T.T. Pank , Sisse Hansen , Lis K. Sondergaard , Mark F. McEntee , Malene Roland V. Pedersen
{"title":"丹麦放射科超声技术质量保证","authors":"Karen Brage , Kristina T.T. Pank , Sisse Hansen , Lis K. Sondergaard , Mark F. McEntee , Malene Roland V. Pedersen","doi":"10.1016/j.wfumbo.2023.100005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>In general, there is a lack of technical quality assurance (TQA) in ultrasound, which threatens patients. This study aimed to map the level of ultrasound quality assurance in Danish Radiology Departments, assess the intra- and interrater reliability of the in-air method for evaluating transducer quality, and determine the prevalence of faulty transducers.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>From October to November 2021, an anonymous survey focused on the extent of TQA was e-mailed to clinicians (via managers) responsible for ultrasound TQA. The six-item survey included both closed and open-ended questions. In addition, a sample of 63 ultrasound b-mode reverberation images was collected from four Danish Radiological Departments, later rated by two blinded radiographers on a dichotomous scale.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 46 participants responded to the survey. In the survey, 15 respondents reported not having a TQA procedure, while six thought a procedure existed but were uncertain. Various methods were reported for the respondents who answered that TQA was performed (n = 13).</p><p>Half of the respondents (n = 23, 50%) reported experiencing transducer malfunctions, and seven said they did not find the lack of regular testing problematic.</p><p>The interrater reliability was κ = 0.75 (95% CI.: 0.61–0.89), and the inter-rater reliability was κ = 0.84 (95% CI.: 0.70–0.98). Based on the agreement between the two raters, 20 out of 50 (40%) transducers were flawed.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This study demonstrates the general deficiency of TQA in Danish Radiological Departments, with 21 clinicians responsible for ultrasound TQA responding either not having a TQA procedure or being uncertain if one exists. Furthermore, the study reveals that the in-air method for assessing transducer quality demonstrates moderate to almost perfect reliability and that nearly half of the transducer tested exhibits visual faults.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101281,"journal":{"name":"WFUMB Ultrasound Open","volume":"1 1","pages":"Article 100005"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Technical ultrasonic quality assurance in Danish Radiology Departments\",\"authors\":\"Karen Brage , Kristina T.T. Pank , Sisse Hansen , Lis K. Sondergaard , Mark F. McEntee , Malene Roland V. Pedersen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.wfumbo.2023.100005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>In general, there is a lack of technical quality assurance (TQA) in ultrasound, which threatens patients. This study aimed to map the level of ultrasound quality assurance in Danish Radiology Departments, assess the intra- and interrater reliability of the in-air method for evaluating transducer quality, and determine the prevalence of faulty transducers.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>From October to November 2021, an anonymous survey focused on the extent of TQA was e-mailed to clinicians (via managers) responsible for ultrasound TQA. The six-item survey included both closed and open-ended questions. In addition, a sample of 63 ultrasound b-mode reverberation images was collected from four Danish Radiological Departments, later rated by two blinded radiographers on a dichotomous scale.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 46 participants responded to the survey. In the survey, 15 respondents reported not having a TQA procedure, while six thought a procedure existed but were uncertain. Various methods were reported for the respondents who answered that TQA was performed (n = 13).</p><p>Half of the respondents (n = 23, 50%) reported experiencing transducer malfunctions, and seven said they did not find the lack of regular testing problematic.</p><p>The interrater reliability was κ = 0.75 (95% CI.: 0.61–0.89), and the inter-rater reliability was κ = 0.84 (95% CI.: 0.70–0.98). Based on the agreement between the two raters, 20 out of 50 (40%) transducers were flawed.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This study demonstrates the general deficiency of TQA in Danish Radiological Departments, with 21 clinicians responsible for ultrasound TQA responding either not having a TQA procedure or being uncertain if one exists. Furthermore, the study reveals that the in-air method for assessing transducer quality demonstrates moderate to almost perfect reliability and that nearly half of the transducer tested exhibits visual faults.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101281,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"WFUMB Ultrasound Open\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 100005\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"WFUMB Ultrasound Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949668323000058\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"WFUMB Ultrasound Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949668323000058","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Technical ultrasonic quality assurance in Danish Radiology Departments
Introduction
In general, there is a lack of technical quality assurance (TQA) in ultrasound, which threatens patients. This study aimed to map the level of ultrasound quality assurance in Danish Radiology Departments, assess the intra- and interrater reliability of the in-air method for evaluating transducer quality, and determine the prevalence of faulty transducers.
Methods
From October to November 2021, an anonymous survey focused on the extent of TQA was e-mailed to clinicians (via managers) responsible for ultrasound TQA. The six-item survey included both closed and open-ended questions. In addition, a sample of 63 ultrasound b-mode reverberation images was collected from four Danish Radiological Departments, later rated by two blinded radiographers on a dichotomous scale.
Results
A total of 46 participants responded to the survey. In the survey, 15 respondents reported not having a TQA procedure, while six thought a procedure existed but were uncertain. Various methods were reported for the respondents who answered that TQA was performed (n = 13).
Half of the respondents (n = 23, 50%) reported experiencing transducer malfunctions, and seven said they did not find the lack of regular testing problematic.
The interrater reliability was κ = 0.75 (95% CI.: 0.61–0.89), and the inter-rater reliability was κ = 0.84 (95% CI.: 0.70–0.98). Based on the agreement between the two raters, 20 out of 50 (40%) transducers were flawed.
Conclusion
This study demonstrates the general deficiency of TQA in Danish Radiological Departments, with 21 clinicians responsible for ultrasound TQA responding either not having a TQA procedure or being uncertain if one exists. Furthermore, the study reveals that the in-air method for assessing transducer quality demonstrates moderate to almost perfect reliability and that nearly half of the transducer tested exhibits visual faults.