Personal smartphones for neonatal diagnostic imaging: A prospective crossover study.

AIM: Neonatal clinicians may be asked to review X-ray images when unable to directly access the original image. Transmitting an X-ray image to a smartphone is a technique increasingly being used by clinicians in a number of settings. Minimal data exist on its use in the neonatal setting. Our aim was to compare the ability of neonatal clinicians to correctly diagnose a pneumothorax from a chest radiograph (CXR) viewed on a smartphone, paralleled with the same image viewed on a computer screen. METHODS: We investigated the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predicative value of two methods of viewing CXR images to diagnose pneumothorax, compared with a gold standard radiologist report. Clinicians were presented with 40 CXR images on two occasions, at least 1 week apart. Images were viewed once on a smartphone and once on a computer screen. Both the viewing method and viewing order of the images were randomised. The clinical details of the infant at the time the CXR was taken were provided, and participants were asked if a pneumothorax was present. RESULTS: Twenty-one clinicians viewed all CXR images using both viewing methods (840 paired observations). There was no difference in accuracy of detecting pneumothorax between viewing methods, 81% correctly identified a pneumothorax using the smartphone, versus 80% using the computer screen (P = 0.40 (95% CI), difference -4 to 1.5%). CONCLUSION: Diagnosis of neonatal pneumothorax was as accurate using a smartphone as viewing CXR images displayed on a computer screen when clinicians were presented with X-rays with diagnosis of pneumothorax.

The European database for subspecialist training in neonatology - transparency achieved.

BACKGROUND: The European Society for Neonatology (ESN) developed a curriculum for subspecialist training in Europe recommending standards for national neonatal training programmes. We speculate whether these official recommendations are widely accepted or used in practice. OBJECTIVES: To characterize the variation in national neonatal training programmes, to enhance transparency, and to compare them to the ESN Curriculum. METHODS: We constructed a database based on the backbone of the ESN Curriculum: (1) training - knowledge, (2) training - skills, (3) key competencies, (4) personal development, and (5) recording of progress. National neonatal representatives from all 30 member states of the Union of European Medical Specialties (UEMS) provided data on national training programmes. RESULTS: Although only one country (3%) based its neonatology training entirely on the ESN Curriculum, we found high levels of uniformity among the UEMS member countries regarding knowledge, skills, and key competencies needed to practice neonatology at a tertiary care level. Discrepancy was encountered on ethical and legal issues and on personal development of the trainees. Mentoring and professional evaluation was generally not implemented in the participating countries. CONCLUSIONS: There is an awareness and readiness to focus on educational demands for neonatal trainees. Further discussions about the overall educational goals of neonatal training and the essence of practicing neonatology in each country are needed. The ESN will undertake this process to provide an updated and effective syllabus aimed to harmonize care and outcomes for babies and their families across Europe.