{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,4]],"date-time":"2026-06-04T23:58:23Z","timestamp":1780617503318,"version":"3.54.1"},"reference-count":37,"publisher":"MDPI AG","issue":"22","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2024,11,16]],"date-time":"2024-11-16T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1731715200000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["JCM"],"abstract":"<jats:p>Background\/Objectives: Systematic quality review of ultrasound exams is recommended to ensure accurate diagnosis. Our primary objectives were to develop a quantitative method for quality review of estimated fetal weight (EFW) and to assess the accuracy of EFW for an entire practice and for individual personnel. A secondary objective was to evaluate the accuracy of fetal sex determination. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study. Eligible ultrasound exams included singleton pregnancies with live birth and known birth weight (BW). A published method was used to predict BW from EFW for exams with ultrasound-to-delivery intervals of up to 12 weeks. Mean error and median absolute error (AE) were compared between different personnel. Image audits were performed for exams with AE &gt; 30% and exams with reported fetal sex different than newborn sex. Results: We analyzed 1938 exams from 890 patients. In the last exam before birth, the median AE was 5.9%, and the predicted BW was within \u00b120% of the actual BW in 97.2% of patients. AE was &gt;30% in 28 exams (1.4%); image audit found correct caliper placement in all 28. Only two patients (0.2%) had AE &gt; 30% on the last exam before birth. One sonographer systematically over-measured head and abdominal circumferences, leading to EFWs that were overestimated. Reported fetal sex differed from newborn sex in seven exams (0.4%) and five patients (0.6%). Images in four of these patients were annotated with the correct fetal sex, but a clerical error was made in the report. In one patient, an unclear image was labeled \u201cprobably female\u201d, but the newborn was male. Conclusions: The accuracy of EFW in this practice was similar to literature reports. The quantitative analysis identified a sonographer with outlier measurements. Time-consuming image audits could be focused on a small number of exams with large errors. We suggest some enhancements to ultrasound reporting software that may help to reduce clerical errors. We provide tools to help other practices perform similar quality reviews.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.3390\/jcm13226895","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2024,11,19]],"date-time":"2024-11-19T09:30:25Z","timestamp":1732008625000},"page":"6895","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/mdpi_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":2,"title":["Quantitative Approach to Quality Review of Prenatal Ultrasound Examinations: Estimated Fetal Weight and Fetal Sex"],"prefix":"10.3390","volume":"13","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-5571-9579","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"C. Andrew","family":"Combs","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Pediatrix Center for Research, Education, Quality & Safety, Sunrise, FL 33323, USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-3448-0730","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Ryan C.","family":"Lee","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Obstetrix of California, Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Sarah Y.","family":"Lee","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Obstetrix of California, Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Sushma","family":"Amara","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Eastside Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Bellevue, WA 98004, USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Olaide","family":"Ashimi Balogun","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Obstetrix Maternal-Fetal Medicine Specialists, Houston, TX 77054, USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"1968","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,11,16]]},"reference":[{"key":"ref_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (2018). AIUM-ACR-ACOG-SMFM-SRU practice parameter for the performance of standard diagnostic obstetric ultrasound examinations. J. Ultrasound Med., 37, E13\u2013E24.","DOI":"10.1002\/jum.14831"},{"key":"ref_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"35","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.19066","article-title":"Ultrasonographic estimation of fetal weight: Development of new model and assessment of performance of previous models","volume":"52","author":"Hammami","year":"2018","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_3","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM), Martins, J.G., Biggio, J.R., and Abuhamad, A. (2020). Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Consult Series #52: Diagnosis and management of fetal growth restriction. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol., 223, B2\u2013B19.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2020.05.010"},{"key":"ref_4","first-page":"17","article-title":"Ultrasonic prediction of fetal macrosomia. Association with cesarean delivery","volume":"45","author":"Parry","year":"2000","journal-title":"J. Reprod. Med."},{"key":"ref_5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"340.e1","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2008.12.043","article-title":"Overestimation of fetal weight by ultrasound: Does it influence the likelihood of cesarean delivery for labor arrest?","volume":"200","author":"Blackwell","year":"2009","journal-title":"Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"225","DOI":"10.7863\/jum.2010.29.2.225","article-title":"Sonographic prediction of fetal macrosomia. The consequences of false diagnosis","volume":"29","author":"Melamed","year":"2010","journal-title":"J. Ultrasound Med."},{"key":"ref_7","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"309.e1","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2012.06.065","article-title":"Estimated fetal weight by ultrasound: A modifiable risk factor for cesarean delivery?","volume":"207","author":"Little","year":"2012","journal-title":"Am. J. JObstet Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_8","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"701","DOI":"10.7863\/ultra.15.04017","article-title":"Relationship between third-trimester sonographic estimation of fetal weight and mode of delivery","volume":"35","author":"Yee","year":"2016","journal-title":"J. Ultrasound Med."},{"key":"ref_9","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"487","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000001571","article-title":"Association of recorded estimated fetal weight and cesarean delivery in attempted vaginal delivery at term","volume":"128","author":"Froehlich","year":"2016","journal-title":"Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_10","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1172","DOI":"10.1080\/14767058.2016.1208744","article-title":"The effect of a sonographic estimated fetal weight on the risk of cesarean delivery in macrosomic and small for gestational-age infants","volume":"30","author":"Matthews","year":"2017","journal-title":"J. Matern. Fetal Neonatal Med."},{"key":"ref_11","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Stubert, J., Peschel, A., Bolz, M., Glass, A., and Gerber, B. (2018). Accuracy of immediate antepartum ultrasound estimated fetal weight and its impact on mode of delivery and outcome\u2014A cohort analysis. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 18.","DOI":"10.1186\/s12884-018-1772-7"},{"key":"ref_12","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e127","DOI":"10.1055\/s-0039-1684035","article-title":"Sonographic estimated fetal weight and cesarean delivery among nulliparous women with obesity","volume":"9","author":"Dude","year":"2019","journal-title":"Am. J. Perinatol. Rep."},{"key":"ref_13","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"19","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2017.06.033","article-title":"Proceedings: Beyond Ultrasound First Forum on improving the quality of ultrasound imaging in obstetrics and gynecology","volume":"218","author":"Benacerraf","year":"2018","journal-title":"Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_14","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (2023). Executive summary: Workshop on developing an optimal maternal-fetal medicine ultrasound practice, February 7\u20138, 2023, cosponsored by the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine, American Registry for Diagnostic Medical Sonography, Internation Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, Gottesfeld-Hohler Memorial Foundation, and Perinatal Quality Foundation. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol., 229, B20\u2013B24.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2023.06.009"},{"key":"ref_15","unstructured":"American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (2024, November 10). Standards and Guidelines for the Accreditation of Ultrasound Practices. Available online: https:\/\/www.aium.org\/resources\/official-statements\/view\/standards-and-guidelines-for-the-accreditation-of-ultrasound-practices."},{"key":"ref_16","unstructured":"American College of Radiology (2024, November 10). Physician QA Requirements: CT, MRI, Nuclear Medicine\/PET, Ultrasound (Revised 1-3-2024). Available online: https:\/\/accreditationsupport.acr.org\/support\/solutions\/articles\/11000068451-physician-qa-requirements-ct-mri-nuclear-medicine-pet-ultrasound-revised-9-7-2021-."},{"key":"ref_17","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Committee on Obstetric Practice, American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (2014). Method for estimating due date. Committee Opinion number 611. Obstet. Gynecol., 124, 863\u2013866.","DOI":"10.1097\/01.AOG.0000454932.15177.be"},{"key":"ref_18","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Kiserud, T., Piaggio, G., Carroli, G., Widmer, M., Carvalho, J., Jensen, L.N., Giordano, D., Cecatti, J.G., Aleem, H.A., and Talegawkar, S.A. (2017). The World Health Organization Fetal Growth Charts: A multination study of ultrasound biometric measurements and estimated fetal weight. PLoS Med., 14.","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pmed.1002284"},{"key":"ref_19","first-page":"100732","article-title":"Choice of standards for sonographic fetal abdominal circumference percentile","volume":"4","author":"Combs","year":"2022","journal-title":"Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Matern.-Fetal Med."},{"key":"ref_20","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e2625","DOI":"10.1055\/a-2135-6838","article-title":"Selection of standards for sonographic fetal head circumference by use of z-scores","volume":"41","author":"Combs","year":"2024","journal-title":"Am. J. Perinatol."},{"key":"ref_21","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e3147","DOI":"10.1055\/a-2196-6835","article-title":"Selection of standards for sonographic fetal femur length by use of z-scores","volume":"41","author":"Combs","year":"2024","journal-title":"Am. J. Perinatol."},{"key":"ref_22","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"333","DOI":"10.1016\/0002-9378(85)90298-4","article-title":"Estimation of fetal weight with the use of head, body, and femur measurements\u2014A prospective study","volume":"151","author":"Hadlock","year":"1985","journal-title":"Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_23","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"32","DOI":"10.1177\/1742271X17732807","article-title":"The accuracy of ultrasound estimation of fetal weight in comparison to birthweight: A systematic review","volume":"24","author":"Milner","year":"2018","journal-title":"Ultrasound"},{"key":"ref_24","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"28","DOI":"10.3109\/00016349609033279","article-title":"Gestation-adjusted projection of estimated fetal weight","volume":"75","author":"Mongelli","year":"1996","journal-title":"Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand."},{"key":"ref_25","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Combs, C.A., Amara, S., Kline, C., Ashimi Balogun, O., and Bowman, Z.S. (2024). Quantitative approach to quality review of prenatal ultraound examinations: Fetal biometry. J. Clin. Med., 13.","DOI":"10.20944\/preprints202410.1973.v1"},{"key":"ref_26","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"678.e1","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2023.06.035","article-title":"Fetal growth restriction and small for gestational age as predictors of neonatal morbidity: Which growth nomogram to use?","volume":"229","author":"Lunsdberg","year":"2023","journal-title":"Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_27","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Ewington, L.J., Hugh, O., Butler, E., Quenby, S., and Gardosi, J. (2024). Accuracy of antenatal ultrasound in predicting large-for-gestational-age babies: Population-based cohort study. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol., online ahead of print.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2024.04.052"},{"key":"ref_28","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Liauw, J., Mayer, C., Albert, A., Fernandez, A., and Hutcheon, J.A. (2022). Which chart and which cut-point: Deciding on the INTERGOWTH, World Health Organization, or Hadlock fetal growth chart?. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 22.","DOI":"10.1186\/s12884-021-04324-0"},{"key":"ref_29","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"779","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jacr.2019.12.023","article-title":"Forty-one million RADPEER reviews later: What we have learned and are still learning","volume":"17","author":"Chaudhry","year":"2020","journal-title":"J. Am. Coll. Radiol."},{"key":"ref_30","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"122","DOI":"10.1177\/0284185120981574","article-title":"Overnight radiology resident discrepancies at a large pediatric hospital: Categorization by year of training, program, imaging modality, and report type","volume":"63","author":"Dinh","year":"2022","journal-title":"Acta Radiol."},{"key":"ref_31","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"160","DOI":"10.1055\/a-1178-1113","article-title":"Time requirement and feasibility of a systematic quality peer review of reporting in radiology","volume":"193","author":"Maurer","year":"2021","journal-title":"Fortschr. Rontgenstr."},{"key":"ref_32","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"287","DOI":"10.1007\/s13244-018-0599-0","article-title":"Added value of double reading in diagnostic radiology, a systematic review","volume":"9","author":"Geijer","year":"2018","journal-title":"Insights Imaging"},{"key":"ref_33","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1519","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jacr.2016.08.005","article-title":"Meaningful peer review in radiology: A review of current practices and future directions","volume":"13","author":"Moriarity","year":"2016","journal-title":"J. Am. Coll. Radiol."},{"key":"ref_34","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"332","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.18811","article-title":"Quality control of ultrasound for fetal biometry: Results from the INTERGROWTH-21st project","volume":"52","author":"Cavallaro","year":"2018","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol."},{"key":"ref_35","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Balogh, E.P., Miller Bt Ball, J.R., Board on Health Care Services, and Institute of Medicine (2015). Improving Diagnosis in Health Care, National Academies Press.","DOI":"10.17226\/21794"},{"key":"ref_36","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"129","DOI":"10.1148\/radiology.181.1.1887021","article-title":"In utero analysis of fetal growth: A sonographic weight standard","volume":"181","author":"Hadlock","year":"1991","journal-title":"Radiology"},{"key":"ref_37","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"16","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000000345","article-title":"A revised birth weight reference for the United States","volume":"124","author":"Duryea","year":"2014","journal-title":"Obstet. Gynecol."}],"container-title":["Journal of Clinical Medicine"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.mdpi.com\/2077-0383\/13\/22\/6895\/pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,10,10]],"date-time":"2025-10-10T16:33:29Z","timestamp":1760114009000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.mdpi.com\/2077-0383\/13\/22\/6895"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2024,11,16]]},"references-count":37,"journal-issue":{"issue":"22","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,11]]}},"alternative-id":["jcm13226895"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/jcm13226895","relation":{},"ISSN":["2077-0383"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2077-0383","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2024,11,16]]}}}