Prenatal three‐dimensional ultrasound: perception of sonographers, sonologists and undergraduate students

• Published in: Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology 2007-07, Vol.30 (1), p.77-80
• Main Authors: Lee, S., Pretorius, D. H., Asfoor, S., Hull, A. D., Newton, R. P., Hollenbach, K., Nelson, T. R.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Allied Health Personnel - psychology; Attitude; Biological and medical sciences; Female; Fetal Development - physiology; fetus; Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics; Humans; Imaging, Three-Dimensional - psychology; Male; Maternal-Fetal Relations - psychology; maternal–fetal bonding; Medical sciences; Middle Aged; Perception; Pregnancy; Students, Medical - psychology; Surveys and Questionnaires; three‐dimensional; ultrasonography; Ultrasonography, Prenatal - psychology
• ISSN: 0960-7692; 1469-0705
• DOI: 10.1002/uog.4000

Objective To assess the perception of non‐pregnant sonographers, sonologists and undergraduate students on the use of three‐dimensional (3D) ultrasound technology in fetal medicine. Methods This was a study of two groups of non‐pregnant subjects. Group I included 520 (305 female, 215 male) medical professionals who completed a questionnaire after attending a lecture on 3D imaging. Factors such as gender, career and having children were analyzed with respect to the attendee's responses about use of 3D ultrasound for medical purposes and for reassurance. Group II included 137 (75 female, 60 male, two unknown) undergraduate students from bioengineering, psychology and physiology classes who completed a questionnaire after attending a brief presentation on two‐dimensional and 3D fetal imaging. Factors such as gender and area of educational interest were analyzed with respect to the students' responses about the use of 3D ultrasound for medical purposes and for parental–fetal attachment. Results In Group I, 63% said that they would like to have a 3D ultrasound examination in the future, while 14% said that they would not. Common reasons given for wanting a 3D ultrasound exam in the future were for medical purposes (39%) or reassurance (18%). The main differences perceived between two‐dimensional (2D) and 3D ultrasound were medical advantages (65%) and parental reassurance (28%). 62.4% of Group I thought 3D technology should be in wide use in obstetric ultrasound and 73.6% thought that 3D ultrasound would reassure parents carrying normal fetuses. Gender, age and career did not have a significant influence on perception of 3D ultrasound. In Group II, the majority (91%) said they could see a remarkable difference between 2D and 3D ultrasound. 83% responded that they would like to have a 3D ultrasound examination of their own baby in the future for the following reasons: 34% for the detailed picture, 31% for increased abnormality detection, 13% for reassurance or curiosity; 8% thought it would be unnecessary or a negative experience. Concerning parental–fetal attachment, 72% thought 3D ultrasound would have a positive effect. The majority of Group II (93%) thought 3D ultrasound would be valuable and 56% thought 3D ultrasound would assist in diagnosing fetal abnormalities. There was no significant relationship between gender, age or area of interest and the perception of 3D ultrasound. Conclusions Responses by sonographers and physicians suggest that 3D ultrasound w