Accuracy of Ultrasound Measurements by Novices: Pixels or Voxels

Abstract

During the last two decades three-dimensional (3D) ultrasound has become increasingly popular around the world. There have been a great number of research papers studying its feasibility as well as reliability and accuracy. Compared to two-dimensional (2D), 3D ultrasound produces better visualization with minimal probe manipulation. The sonographer performing 2D ultrasound has to mentally assemble crosssectional images of a structure and/or object into a 3D image. In cases with uncertain anatomic orientation less experienced examiners may experience difficulties in envisioning three dimensions of the visualized structure, lesion or organ. Patients and parents are often faced with similar problems. A number of studies have shown that novice operators can efficiently store and interpret the volume data by 3D ultrasound, which may have many positive implications in the practice.

Evaluating Affordable Cranial Ultrasonography in East African Neonatal Intensive Care Units

“…In addition to illustrating the utility of an affordable, portable ultrasound unit, this study offers insight into the expertise required to operate the machine and interpret the images (Nguyen et al 2011). There was in general high agreement between the novice sonographer and the expert in both quantitative measurements of anatomy and qualitative identification of common abnormalities in the neonatal brain.…”

Telesonography in emergency medicine: A systematic review

“…It has been proposed that the use of 3D scans, which do not require the operator to understand the interaction between the 2D ultrasound beam and the 3D anatomy, will reduce the risk of novice operators acquiring inadequate ultrasound images [ 48 ]. A review in 2011 of 3D ultrasound for novices found that 3D ultrasound may be superior to 2D imaging techniques in improving the reliability of measurements of irregular organs, reducing both the time required for scanning and the need for rescanning of patients [ 48 ]. However, only two papers used this technique within this review and there was no critical evaluation of the relative effectiveness of this method within emergency medicine [ 15 , 34 ].…”