
doi: 10.1002/pd.6389
pmid: 37269059
AbstractObjectivesFirst‐trimester ultrasound screening is increasingly performed to detect fetal anomalies early in pregnancy, aiming to enhance reproductive autonomy for future parents. This study aims to display the current practice of first‐trimester ultrasound screening in developed countries.MethodAn online survey among 47 prenatal screening experts in developed countries.ResultsFirst‐trimester structural anomaly screening is available in 30 of the 33 countries and is mostly offered to all women with generally high uptakes. National protocols are available in 23/30 (76.7%) countries, but the extent of anatomy assessment varies. Monitoring of scan quality occurs in 43.3% of the countries. 23/43 (53.5%) of the respondents considered the quality of first‐trimester ultrasound screening unequal in different regions of their country.ConclusionsFirst‐trimester screening for structural fetal anomalies is widely offered in developed countries, but large differences are reported in availability and use of screening protocols, the extent of anatomy assessment, training and experience of sonographers and quality monitoring systems. Consequently, this results in an unequal offer to parents in developed countries, sometimes even within the same country. Furthermore, as offer and execution differ widely, this has to be taken into account when results of screening policies are scientifically published or compared.
Developed Countries, Radboud University Medical Center, Ultrasonography, Prenatal, Pregnancy Trimester, First, Prenatal Diagnosis/methods, Pregnancy, Prenatal Diagnosis, Journal Article, Radboudumc 0: Other Research Gynaecology, Humans, Female, Ultrasonography
Developed Countries, Radboud University Medical Center, Ultrasonography, Prenatal, Pregnancy Trimester, First, Prenatal Diagnosis/methods, Pregnancy, Prenatal Diagnosis, Journal Article, Radboudumc 0: Other Research Gynaecology, Humans, Female, Ultrasonography
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 16 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
