Richard Evans, the Society of Radiographers' chief executive officer, has appeared on several television and radio broadcasts, commenting on the Society's recently issued statement discouraging patients and partners from using mobile phones or video cameras to record ultrasound examinations of pregnant mums.

He was interviewed on BBC Radio 5 Live's Drive programme on 21 July.

On 24 July, he appeared on the BBC Breakfast show and was also interviewed by BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.



Sonographers who carry out ultrasound examinations during the course of a pregnancy are increasingly being asked by people accompanying the patient if they can make a recording of the scan.



New guidance from the Society and College of Radiographers (SCoR), which represents sonographers, says that whilst the decision as to whether recording should be permitted is a matter of policy for individual hospitals, their recommendation is that it should not be allowed.



"The concern is that recording can affect the concentration of the sonographer doing the examination and he or she may be distracted and miss vital observations," said Nigel Thomson from the SCoR.



"People taking home videos can also unnecessarily extend the time of the ultrasound examination," he continued. "We would like to see hospitals have a clear policy following a risk assessment taking account of sonographer preferences, local policies and the views of patient liaison groups.



"Departments should also advise staff how to deal with people who film without permission, or carry on when asked to stop."



The recording of images during diagnostic or screening obstetric ultrasound examinations can be viewed and printed at doc-lib.sor.org.



The BBC Radio 5 Live interview can be heard as part of the Drive programme broadcast at http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/radio/bbc_radio_five_live

Richard’s interview on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme can be heard on the BBC Radio 4 website.

To view coverage on the BBC News website, click here.

Public reactions

The media coverage has created a lot of interest in the Society's statement and has generated some responses from the public. Here are just a few of the comments the Society has received:

“I have just read the news bite of your statement made about discouraging patients and partners from using mobile phones or video cameras to record ultrasound examinations of pregnant mums. This statement you made makes me feel like making a statement of my own experience as a father/health professional present at my wife's ultrasound examination.
 
I was asked to enter a room by the examining practitioner with no patient meeting formalities, no patient relationship was intended by the practitioner. It was a cold feeling from my perspective and my wife's. 
 


“I understand the purpose of an ultrasound.
 
Objectively, some people meet together in a room at close quarters they are health practitioners and their clients.
 
Subjectively, radiographers and their clients enter into a short relationship and perhaps this is the reason why they might get away with being almost rude and definitely sour faced.
 
Again I understand the purpose an ultrasound.
 


“You made a public statement of the viewpoint of your profession which I will often reflect on.
 
I do not look forward to my next radiographer appointment in any way, shape or form.”

 

“I can only hope Mr Evans was misquoted by the BBC news website as saying that recording of scans should be banned in part because 'there could be legal complications if an abnormality is recorded by the scan, but not reported or acted upon.'

“The highest priority must be the health of mother and child, there could be a 100 to 1 chance that someone else viewing the video – a doctor in the family, someone who had had problems in their own pregnancy, or even the parents who watch it the most – might spot a problem and it could then be acted on. Closing the door to such an opportunity simply to 'cover people's backs' is a disgraceful thing to even suggest. 
Distraction of the sonographer is another matter, I agree.”


 


“I am a member of the general public who noted the Society's advice to ban ultrasound recordings on mobile phones, etc. My suggestion is the SCoR should re-consider this policy, to make a positive statement about this technology. 

"Many years ago my wife was diagnosed with cancer; at the preliminary meeting, the consultant voluntarily offered to record the discussion for us (on cassette – that was the technology at the time). The premise was that the patient (and accompanying partner) would be unlikely to remember all the nuances of the discussion – giving us a recording to take home allowed us to review what we had been told, generate questions, etc.  This approach is still remembered as excellent.

"The mobile phone is today's equivalent. The SCoR (and other services) should be developing policies that embrace such technology; a positive statement, albeit with guidance, would build on the opportunities that could come from this situation.”

“Parents-to-be 'should stop filming ultrasounds'

“Seriously?  Are sonographers more interested in what the parents-to-be are doing than the job at hand? If so, then they should be thoroughly slapped and told to keep their focus on the job at hand.

“A sonographer's job is to make sure that the baby is ok during an ultrasound, it IS NOT their job to see if the patient is taking pictures/making a video of the proceedings.”

Posted: 22/07/2010