{"id":{"repo_id":"cape-town","oai_identifier":"oai:open.uct.ac.za:11427/39273"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/cape-town/oai:open.uct.ac.za:11427/39273","repository":{"repo_id":"cape-town","name":"University of Cape Town","base_url":"https://open.uct.ac.za/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Quality of neonatal cranial ultrasound Interpretation among doctors in the Western Cape Metro: a clinical survey","abstract":"Background: Cranial ultrasound (cUS) is a recommended skill for paediatric and neonatal trainees in South Africa. Surveys in other countries showed inadequate knowledge and subsequently a global trend towards standards and training recommendations. There are no guidelines for training of clinicians performing cUS in South Africa. Objectives: To survey the following aspects of cUS among paediatric and neonatal trainees in the University of Cape Town (UCT): duration of paediatric training, experience and supervision; knowledge of reporting content, procedural and technical aspects; interpretation of common neonatal cUS pathologies and confidence in scan interpretation and counselling. Methods: An online survey was sent to all trainees, who had worked at least one month at a neonatal unit on the UCT training platform. The survey included seven questions on cUS interpretation. Procedural and image knowledge was compared between groups with ≥ 24 months' experience versus shorter duration. Results: Thirty-one paediatric registrars and five neonatal subspecialty senior registrars were sent the survey. Twenty-six surveys were returned (72%). None of the trainees had attended a formal cUS course, 18 (69%) had attended a formal lecture from a neonatologist, and 8 (30%) had attended a formal tutorial from a consultant. Ten (38%) trainees received initial training from other registrars, medical officers, or self-study. The components of a cUS report were stated as description of anatomy and haemorrhage by 24 (92%) and 21 (81%) respectively; only 17 (65%) mentioned ventricular size and other aspects of reporting were less frequently mentioned. Only 7 (27%) trainees knew the correct number of images to be taken in the coronal and sagittal planes. Correct identification of the major features of images ranged from 12% to 92% but was below 40% in five questions. Duration of training only affected answers in two questions; trainees with ≥ 24 months experience were more likely to correctly identify a normal scan (58% vs. 14%; p=0.038) and less likely to assign abnormal prognosis in a term infant with increased white matter echogenicity (0% vs. 43%; p=0.017). Conclusions: Our survey shows inadequate and variable cUS training and competency in paediatric and neonatal trainees in our institution. The findings indicate the need for a structured training program and standardised diagnostic and training criteria to accredit clinicians who perform and report on neonatal cUS.","abstract_html":"Background: Cranial ultrasound (cUS) is a recommended skill for paediatric and neonatal trainees in South Africa. Surveys in other countries showed inadequate knowledge and subsequently a global trend towards standards and training recommendations. There are no guidelines for training of clinicians performing cUS in South Africa. Objectives: To survey the following aspects of cUS among paediatric and neonatal trainees in the University of Cape Town (UCT): duration of paediatric training, experience and supervision; knowledge of reporting content, procedural and technical aspects; interpretation of common neonatal cUS pathologies and confidence in scan interpretation and counselling. Methods: An online survey was sent to all trainees, who had worked at least one month at a neonatal unit on the UCT training platform. The survey included seven questions on cUS interpretation. Procedural and image knowledge was compared between groups with ≥ 24 months' experience versus shorter duration. Results: Thirty-one paediatric registrars and five neonatal subspecialty senior registrars were sent the survey. Twenty-six surveys were returned (72%). None of the trainees had attended a formal cUS course, 18 (69%) had attended a formal lecture from a neonatologist, and 8 (30%) had attended a formal tutorial from a consultant. Ten (38%) trainees received initial training from other registrars, medical officers, or self-study. The components of a cUS report were stated as description of anatomy and haemorrhage by 24 (92%) and 21 (81%) respectively; only 17 (65%) mentioned ventricular size and other aspects of reporting were less frequently mentioned. Only 7 (27%) trainees knew the correct number of images to be taken in the coronal and sagittal planes. Correct identification of the major features of images ranged from 12% to 92% but was below 40% in five questions. Duration of training only affected answers in two questions; trainees with ≥ 24 months experience were more likely to correctly identify a normal scan (58% vs. 14%; p=0.038) and less likely to assign abnormal prognosis in a term infant with increased white matter echogenicity (0% vs. 43%; p=0.017). Conclusions: Our survey shows inadequate and variable cUS training and competency in paediatric and neonatal trainees in our institution. The findings indicate the need for a structured training program and standardised diagnostic and training criteria to accredit clinicians who perform and report on neonatal cUS.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Belay, Fitsum"],"institution":"Division of Neonatology","degree_name":null,"degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Pillay, Shakti","Horn Alan"],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2023,"date_issued":"2023","date_published":"2023","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:23:10Z","subjects":["Neonatology"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/11427/39273","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Pillay, Shakti","Horn Alan"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Belay, Fitsum"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2024-04-03T12:48:15Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2024-04-03T12:48:15Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2023"]},{"key":"dc:publisher.department","label":"Dc Publisher Department","values":["Division of Neonatology"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis / Dissertation"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationlevel","label":"Dc Type Qualificationlevel","values":["Masters","MPhil"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Neonatology"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/11427/39273"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Background: Cranial ultrasound (cUS) is a recommended skill for paediatric and neonatal trainees in South Africa. Surveys in other countries showed inadequate knowledge and subsequently a global trend towards standards and training recommendations. There are no guidelines for training of clinicians performing cUS in South Africa. Objectives: To survey the following aspects of cUS among paediatric and neonatal trainees in the University of Cape Town (UCT): duration of paediatric training, experience and supervision; knowledge of reporting content, procedural and technical aspects; interpretation of common neonatal cUS pathologies and confidence in scan interpretation and counselling. Methods: An online survey was sent to all trainees, who had worked at least one month at a neonatal unit on the UCT training platform. The survey included seven questions on cUS interpretation. Procedural and image knowledge was compared between groups with ≥ 24 months' experience versus shorter duration. Results: Thirty-one paediatric registrars and five neonatal subspecialty senior registrars were sent the survey. Twenty-six surveys were returned (72%). None of the trainees had attended a formal cUS course, 18 (69%) had attended a formal lecture from a neonatologist, and 8 (30%) had attended a formal tutorial from a consultant. Ten (38%) trainees received initial training from other registrars, medical officers, or self-study. The components of a cUS report were stated as description of anatomy and haemorrhage by 24 (92%) and 21 (81%) respectively; only 17 (65%) mentioned ventricular size and other aspects of reporting were less frequently mentioned. Only 7 (27%) trainees knew the correct number of images to be taken in the coronal and sagittal planes. Correct identification of the major features of images ranged from 12% to 92% but was below 40% in five questions. Duration of training only affected answers in two questions; trainees with ≥ 24 months experience were more likely to correctly identify a normal scan (58% vs. 14%; p=0.038) and less likely to assign abnormal prognosis in a term infant with increased white matter echogenicity (0% vs. 43%; p=0.017). Conclusions: Our survey shows inadequate and variable cUS training and competency in paediatric and neonatal trainees in our institution. The findings indicate the need for a structured training program and standardised diagnostic and training criteria to accredit clinicians who perform and report on neonatal cUS."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Quality of neonatal cranial ultrasound Interpretation among doctors in the Western Cape Metro: a clinical survey"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Pillay, Shakti","Horn Alan"],"dc:creator":["Belay, Fitsum"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2024-04-03T12:48:15Z"],"dc:date.available":["2024-04-03T12:48:15Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2023"],"dc:description.abstract":["Background: Cranial ultrasound (cUS) is a recommended skill for paediatric and neonatal trainees in South Africa. Surveys in other countries showed inadequate knowledge and subsequently a global trend towards standards and training recommendations. There are no guidelines for training of clinicians performing cUS in South Africa. Objectives: To survey the following aspects of cUS among paediatric and neonatal trainees in the University of Cape Town (UCT): duration of paediatric training, experience and supervision; knowledge of reporting content, procedural and technical aspects; interpretation of common neonatal cUS pathologies and confidence in scan interpretation and counselling. Methods: An online survey was sent to all trainees, who had worked at least one month at a neonatal unit on the UCT training platform. The survey included seven questions on cUS interpretation. Procedural and image knowledge was compared between groups with ≥ 24 months' experience versus shorter duration. Results: Thirty-one paediatric registrars and five neonatal subspecialty senior registrars were sent the survey. Twenty-six surveys were returned (72%). None of the trainees had attended a formal cUS course, 18 (69%) had attended a formal lecture from a neonatologist, and 8 (30%) had attended a formal tutorial from a consultant. Ten (38%) trainees received initial training from other registrars, medical officers, or self-study. The components of a cUS report were stated as description of anatomy and haemorrhage by 24 (92%) and 21 (81%) respectively; only 17 (65%) mentioned ventricular size and other aspects of reporting were less frequently mentioned. Only 7 (27%) trainees knew the correct number of images to be taken in the coronal and sagittal planes. Correct identification of the major features of images ranged from 12% to 92% but was below 40% in five questions. Duration of training only affected answers in two questions; trainees with ≥ 24 months experience were more likely to correctly identify a normal scan (58% vs. 14%; p=0.038) and less likely to assign abnormal prognosis in a term infant with increased white matter echogenicity (0% vs. 43%; p=0.017). Conclusions: Our survey shows inadequate and variable cUS training and competency in paediatric and neonatal trainees in our institution. The findings indicate the need for a structured training program and standardised diagnostic and training criteria to accredit clinicians who perform and report on neonatal cUS."],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/11427/39273"],"dc:publisher.department":["Division of Neonatology"],"dc:subject":["Neonatology"],"dc:title":["Quality of neonatal cranial ultrasound Interpretation among doctors in the Western Cape Metro: a clinical survey"],"dc:type":["Thesis / Dissertation"],"dc:type.qualificationlevel":["Masters","MPhil"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:23:10Z"}