Premium
Survey of the prevalence and methodology of quality assurance for B‐mode ultrasound image quality among veterinary sonographers
Author(s) -
Hoscheit Larry P.,
Heng Hock Gan,
Lim Chee Kin,
Weng HsinYi
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
veterinary radiology and ultrasound
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.541
H-Index - 60
eISSN - 1740-8261
pISSN - 1058-8183
DOI - 10.1111/vru.12603
Subject(s) - medicine , quality assurance , quality (philosophy) , confidence interval , image quality , ultrasound , medical physics , acceptance testing , radiology , pathology , external quality assessment , artificial intelligence , philosophy , epistemology , computer science , image (mathematics) , software engineering , engineering
Image quality in B‐mode ultrasound is important as it reflects the diagnostic accuracy and diagnostic information provided during clinical scanning. Quality assurance programs for B‐mode ultrasound systems/components are comprised of initial quality acceptance testing and subsequent regularly scheduled quality control testing. The importance of quality assurance programs for B‐mode ultrasound image quality using ultrasound phantoms is well documented in the human medical and medical physics literature. The purpose of this prospective, cross‐sectional, survey study was to determine the prevalence and methodology of quality acceptance testing and quality control testing of image quality for ultrasound system/components among veterinary sonographers. An online electronic survey was sent to 1497 members of veterinary imaging organizations: the American College of Veterinary Radiology, the Veterinary Ultrasound Society, and the European Association of Veterinary Diagnostic Imaging, and a total of 167 responses were received. The results showed that the percentages of veterinary sonographers performing quality acceptance testing and quality control testing are 42% (64/151; 95% confidence interval 34–52%) and 26% (40/156: 95% confidence interval 19–33%) respectively. Of the respondents who claimed to have quality acceptance testing or quality control testing of image quality in place for their ultrasound system/components, 0% have performed quality acceptance testing or quality control testing correctly (quality acceptance testing 95% confidence interval: 0–6%, quality control testing 95% confidence interval: 0–11%). Further education and guidelines are recommended for veterinary sonographers in the area of quality acceptance testing and quality control testing for B‐mode ultrasound equipment/components.