Arch. Dis. Child

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

Published Online First: 13 September 2005. doi:10.1136/adc.2005.079806
Archives of Disease in Childhood - Fetal and Neonatal Edition 2006;91:F11-F16
Copyright © 2006 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
adc.2005.079806v1
91/1/F11    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in ADC Online
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Harris, D L
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Harris, D L

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Variable interpretation of ultrasonograms may contribute to variation in the reported incidence of white matter damage between newborn intensive care units in New Zealand

D L Harris1,2, F H Bloomfield2,3, R L Teele4, J E Harding2,3 on behalf of the Australian and New Zealand Neonatal Network

1 Newborn Intensive Care Unit, Health Waikato, Private Bag 3200, Hamilton, New Zealand
2 Liggins Institute, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand
3 Newborn Services, National Women’s Health, Private Bag 92189, Auckland
4 Department of Paediatric Radiology, Starship Children’s Health, Private Bag 92024, Auckland

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Professor Harding
Liggins Institute, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand; j.harding{at}auckland.ac.nz

Background: The incidence of cerebral white matter damage reported to the Australian and New Zealand Neonatal Network (ANZNN) varies between neonatal intensive care units (NICUs).

Hypothesis: Differences in the capture, storage, and interpretation of the cerebral ultrasound scans could account for some of this variation.

Methods: A total of 255 infants of birth weight <1500 g and gestation <32 weeks born between 1997 and 2002 and drawn equally from each of the six NICUs in New Zealand were randomly selected from the ANZNN database. Half had early cerebral ultrasound scans previously reported to ANZNN as normal, and half had scans reported as abnormal. The original scans were copied, anonymised, and independently read by a panel of three experts using a standardised method of reviewing and reporting.

Results: There was considerable variation between NICUs in methods of image capture, quality, and completeness of the scans. There was only moderate agreement between the reviewers’ reports and the original reports to the ANZNN ({kappa} 0.45–0.51) and between the reviewers ({kappa} 0.54–0.64). The reviewers reported three to six times more white matter damage than had been reported to the ANZNN.

Conclusion: Some of the reported variation in white matter damage between NICUs may be due to differences in capture and interpretation of cerebral ultrasound scans.


Abbreviations: ANZNN, Australian and New Zealand Neonatal Network; GM/IVH, germinal matrix/intraventricular haemorrhage; NICU, neonatal intensive care unit; PVL, periventricular leucomalacia; WMD, white matter damage

Keywords: echoencephalography; central nervous system ultrasonography; premature; interobserver variability; periventricular leucomalacia; white matter







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
ARCH DIS CHILD FETAL NEONATAL ED ED PRACTICE
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2006 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health