Download PDF
Hebamme 2024; 37(05): 21-25
DOI: 10.1055/a-2347-8450
CNE Schwerpunkt
Ultraschall

Point-of-Care-Ultraschall durch Hebammen

Martina Knapp
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Wurden Ultraschalluntersuchungen als Teil der Schwangerenvorsorge lange Zeit hauptsächlich von Ärzt*innen durchgeführt, bieten nun auch immer mehr Hebammen diese Untersuchungen an. Point-of-Care-Ultraschallgeräte ermöglichen eine differenziertere Beobachtung von Mutter und Kind. Der Hebammenultraschall birgt jedoch auch rechtliche und berufspolitische Herausforderungen.



Publication History

Article published online:
22 October 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Becker DM, Tafoya CA, Becker SL. et al. The use of portable ultrasound devices in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review of the literature. Tropical Medicine & International Health 2016; 21: 294-311
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Bentley S, Hexom B, Nelson BP. Evaluation of an obstetric ultrasound curriculum for midwives in liberia. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine 2015; 34: 1563-1568
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Berghella V, Saccone G. Cervical assessment by ultrasound for preventing preterm delivery. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2019; 9: CD007235
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Berghella V, Tolosa JE, Kuhlman K. et al. Cervical ultrasonography compared with manual examination as a predictor of preterm delivery. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecolog 1997; 177: 723-730
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Collins K, Collins C, Kothari A. Point-of-care ultrasound in obstetrics. Australian Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine 2019; 22: 32-39
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Dalmacion GV, Reyles RT, Habana AE. et al. Handheld ultrasound to avert maternal and neonatal deaths in 2 regions of the philippines: An iBuntis® intervention study. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 2018; 18: 32
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 De Castro H, Ciobanu A, Formuso C. et al. Value of routine ultrasound examination at 35–37 weeks’ gestation in diagnosis of non-cephalic presentation. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology 2020; 55: 248-256
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Diefenbacher M. Praxisratgeber Recht für Hebammen. 2., vollständig überarbeitete Aufl. Stuttgart: Hippokrates; 2017
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 9 Edvardsson K, Åhman A, Fagerli TA. et al. Norwegian obstetricians’ experiences of the use of ultrasound in pregnancy management. A qualitative study. Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare 2018; 15: 69-76
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 French S, Henry T, Williams E. Evaluation of waiting times and sonographic findings in patients with first trimester vaginal bleeding at the university hospital of the west indies. Can emergency department ultrasound make a difference? West Indian Medical Journal 2014; 63: 247-251
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Matijevic R, Grgic O, Vasilj O. Is sonographic assessment of cervical length better than digital examination in screening for preterm delivery in a low-risk population?. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 2006; 85: 1342-1347
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Johnston BK, Darling EK, Malott A. et al. Canadian midwives’ perspectives on the clinical impacts of point of care ultrasound in obstetrical care: A concurrent mixed-methods study. Heliyon 2024; 10: e27512
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Kimberly HH, Murray A, Mennicke M. et al. Focused maternal ultrasound by midwives in rural zambia. Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology 2010; 36: 1267-1272
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Knehe HM. Die Haftung der Hebamme. Berling: Springer; 2016
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Lydon-Rochelle M, Albers L, Gotwocia J. et al. Accuracy of leopold maneuvers in screening for malpresentation: A prospective study. Birth 2013; 20: 132-135
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Recker F. Point-of-Care-Ultraschall in Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe. Die Gynäkologie 2013; 56: 897-904
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Reiso M, Langli B, Sommerseth E. et al. A qualitative study of the work experiences of midwives performing obstetric ultrasound in norway. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 2020; 20: 641
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Reynolds TA, Amato S, Kulola I. et al. Impact of point-of-care ultrasound on clinical decision-making at an urban emergency department in tanzania. Plos One 2018; 13: e0194774
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Sayasneh A, Preisler J, Smith A. et al. Do pocket-sized ultrasound machines have the potential to be used as a tool to triage patients in obstetrics and gynecology?. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology 2012; 40: 145-150
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Smallwood N, Dachsel M. Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS): Unnecessary gadgetry or evidence-based medicine?. Clinical Medicine 2018; 18: 219-224
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Stein JC, Wang R, Adler N. et al. Emergency physician ultrasonography for evaluating patients at risk for ectopic pregnancy: A meta-analysis. Annals of Emergency Medicine 2010; 56: 674-683
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Sträßner H. Das Recht der Hebamme: Ein Leitfaden. 1. Aufl. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer; 2017
    Search in Google Scholar