Variable interpretation of ultrasonograms may contribute to variation in the reported incidence of white matter damage between newborn intensive care units in New Zealand. Issue 1 (13th September 2005)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Harris, D L; Bloomfield, F H; Teele, R L; Harding, J E
• Other Names: group-author.
• Is Part Of: Archives of disease in childhood. Volume 91:Issue 1(2006)
• Page Start: F11
• Page End: F16
• Publication Date: 2005-09-13
• Subjects: 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; echoencephalography -- central nervous system ultrasonography -- premature -- interobserver variability -- periventricular leucomalacia -- white matter; Infants -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Newborn infants -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Fetus -- Diseases -- Periodicals; 618.920105
• DOI: 10.1136/adc.2005.079806
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1359-2998

Abstract

Abstract : 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 (κ 0.45–0.51) and between the reviewers (κ 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.