Nuffield Department of Women's & Reproductive Health, Oxford-University, Oxford, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Oxford-University, Oxford, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Ultraschall Med. 2020 Apr;41(2):138-145. doi: 10.1055/a-1074-0722. Epub 2020 Feb 27.
To analyze bioeffect safety indices and assess how often operators look at these indices during routine obstetric ultrasound.
Automated analysis of prospectively collected data including video recordings of full-length ultrasound scans coupled with operator eye tracking was performed. Using optical recognition, we extracted the Mechanical Index (MI), Thermal Index in soft tissue (TIs), and Thermal Index in bone (TIb) values and ultrasound mode. This allowed us to report the bioeffect safety indices during routine obstetric scans and assess adherence to professional organization recommendations. Eye-tracking analysis allowed us to assess how often operators look at the displayed bioeffect safety indices.
A total of 637 ultrasound scans performed by 17 operators were included, of which 178, 216, and 243 scans were first, second, and third-trimester scans, respectively. During live scanning, the mean and range were 0.14 (0.1 to 3.0) for TIb, 0.2 (0.1 to 1.2) for TIs, and 0.9 (0.1 to 1.3) for MI. The mean and standard deviation of TIb were 0.15 ± 0.03, 0.23 ± 0.09, 0.32 ± 0.24 in the first, second, and third trimester, respectively. For B-mode, the highest TIb was 0.8 in all trimesters. The highest TIb was recorded for pulsed-wave Doppler mode in all trimesters. The recommended exposure times were maintained in all scans. Analysis of eye tracking suggested that operators looked at bioeffect safety indices in only 27 (4.2 %) of the scans.
In this study, recommended bioeffect indices were adhered to in all routine scans. However, eye tracking showed that operators rarely assessed safety indices during scanning.
分析生物效应安全指数，并评估操作人员在常规产科超声检查中查看这些指数的频率。
对前瞻性收集的数据进行自动分析，包括全长超声扫描的视频记录和操作人员的眼动追踪。我们使用光学识别技术提取机械指数（MI）、软组织热指数（TIs）和骨热指数（TIb）值和超声模式。这使我们能够在常规产科扫描中报告生物效应安全指数，并评估是否遵守专业组织的建议。眼动追踪分析使我们能够评估操作人员查看显示的生物效应安全指数的频率。
共纳入 17 名操作人员进行的 637 次超声检查，其中 178、216 和 243 次分别为第一、二和三孕期扫描。在实时扫描中，TIb 的平均值和范围分别为 0.14（0.1 至 3.0），TIs 为 0.2（0.1 至 1.2），MI 为 0.9（0.1 至 1.3）。TIb 的平均值和标准差分别为第一、二和三孕期的 0.15±0.03、0.23±0.09 和 0.32±0.24。对于 B 模式，所有孕期的最高 TIb 均为 0.8。所有孕期的最高 TIb 均记录为脉冲波多普勒模式。所有扫描均保持推荐的曝光时间。眼动追踪分析表明，操作人员仅在 27 次（4.2%）扫描中查看了生物效应安全指数。
在这项研究中，所有常规扫描均遵循了推荐的生物效应指数。然而，眼动追踪显示操作人员在扫描过程中很少评估安全指数。
