Hutchon D J, Kearney C
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Memorial Hospital, Darlington, UK.
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1999 Feb;13(2):103-6. doi: 10.1046/j.1469-0705.1999.13020103.x.
To investigate how accurately practicing obstetricians (experts) can apply dating rules and compare the interpretation of gestation-sensitive ultrasound data with those of a computer system.
Seventeen practicing obstetricians. Members of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, from 14 different units throughout the UK.
Six cases with menstrual and ultrasound data together with identical ultrasound charts and obstetric wheels.
Concordance between the calculated estimated date of delivery (EDD) and growth assessment provided by the experts and the computer system.
The calculation of the EDD by the experts was imprecise (59% within 3 days overall). Concordance with the computer calculation was poorest when the ultrasound measurements lay close to the upper or lower centile lines (average 7% within 3 days of the computer). Interpretation of growth showed good concordance with the computer when gestation was not critical to the interpretation (94%), but very poor when gestation was critical (7%).
Calculation of EDD by means of an obstetric wheel and charts is not precise. Compared with the computer system, these errors have a significant effect on the subsequent interpretation of growth scans when the data are borderline. A computer system provides the more accurate method for interpreting gestation-sensitive ultrasound biometry.
调查执业产科医生(专家)应用预产期计算规则的准确性,并将对妊娠敏感的超声数据解读与计算机系统的解读进行比较。
17名执业产科医生。英国皇家妇产科医师学院成员,来自英国各地14个不同单位。
六个包含月经和超声数据的病例,以及相同的超声图表和产科计算盘。
专家和计算机系统计算的预计分娩日期(EDD)与生长评估之间的一致性。
专家计算的EDD不准确(总体59%在3天内)。当超声测量值接近百分位线上限或下限(与计算机计算结果在3天内平均一致性为7%)时,与计算机计算的一致性最差。当妊娠对解读不关键时,生长解读与计算机显示出良好的一致性(94%),但当妊娠关键时,一致性非常差(7%)。
通过产科计算盘和图表计算EDD不准确。与计算机系统相比,当数据处于临界值时,这些误差对后续生长扫描的解读有显著影响。计算机系统为解读妊娠敏感的超声生物测量提供了更准确的方法。