Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2003 Dec;82(12):1092-8.
doi: 10.1046/j.1600-0412.2003.00238.x.

Screening for congenital malformations by ultrasonography in the general population of pregnant women: factors affecting the efficacy

Affiliations
Free article
Comparative Study

Screening for congenital malformations by ultrasonography in the general population of pregnant women: factors affecting the efficacy

Ann Tabor et al. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2003 Dec.
Free article

Abstract

Objectives: To assess whether the efficacy of screening for fetal malformations is affected by patient-, staff-, team- or work environment-related factors.

Methods: A prospective cohort study was carried out at a Danish university hospital with 4000 deliveries per year. In total, 7963 fetuses were examined by midtrimester ultrasound scan during 1997 and 1998. The infants were followed up to the age of at least 1 year. The main outcome measures were the detection rate (DR) of fetal abnormalities in relation to patient factors, staff factors, team and work environment factors.

Results: Significant malformations were detected in 100 fetuses or infants, corresponding to an incidence of 1.3%. The prenatal DR was 60%. High maternal body mass index (BMI) was associated with a lower DR, while the presence of twins, the gestational age at time of screening and the sonographer's level of experience were not. Fetuses with a prenatally undetected malformation were more often examined by more than one sonographer than fetuses without congenital malformations. Workload or monotony did not seem to affect the efficacy of screening. There was a trend towards a lower detection rate at midday and when most of the staff were at work.

Conclusions: Some team and work environment factors that may affect the detection rate of fetal abnormalities were identified and have been changed: appointments for screening have been reorganized, regular breaks for all the staff introduced and second opinions are given by a specialist in fetomaternal medicine. The new system will be followed up to ensure that the reorganization has not created new organizational mistakes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources