了解辽宁省各级医院超声科的基本情况，探讨超声质量控制工作中面临的主要问题。

辽宁省超声医学质量控制中心于2021年3月下发辽宁省超声医学质量控制基线调查问卷，调查对象为辽宁省内各级各类医院的超声科，调查时间为2020年1月1日至12月31日，调查内容包括超声医师基本情况、开展检查项目、年超声检查人次、超声科医师数与诊断仪器数量比、平均住院超声检查预约时间、危急值通报例数、超声报告阳性率和超声诊断符合率等。各级医院间上述超声质量控制指标的比较，采用χ²检验或单因素方差分析。

本次调查共收到辽宁省14个地级市共141家医院的调查问卷，其中包括三级甲等医院48家，三级乙等医院20家，二级甲等医院42家，二级乙等医院5家，其他级别医院26家。各级医院在超声医师平均数量、医师年龄（＞45岁）、职称（高级和初级职称）和学历构成方面比较，差异均具有统计学意义（P均＜0.05）。超声科年门诊、急诊、体检、住院超声检查人次、人均日工作量、急诊超声与床旁超声开展情况在各级医院间比较，差异均有统计学意义（P均＜0.05），其中各类检查人次均以三级甲等医院最高，二级乙等医院最低。各级医院在平均住院超声预约时间方面比较，差异也具有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。在超声检查结果质量分析指标中，各级医院之间超声报告阳性率的比较，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05），其中以三级甲等医院超声报告阳性率最高，达到（78.3±23.6）%；各级医院间超声诊断符合率的比较，差异具有统计学意义（P＜0.05），其中二级乙等医院超声诊断符合率明显较低，为（65.6±11.2）%。

辽宁省各级医院超声科在多项质量控制指标中存在明显差异，辽宁省超声医学质量控制中心基于辽宁省各级医院超声科的发展现状，有针对性地制定相关的质量控制政策和规范，开展相关的质量控制工作，有利于实现辽宁省超声诊断治疗的规范化、标准化、同质化。

To make a preliminary survey on department of ultrasound in various hospitals and probe into the major problems faced by ultrasonic quality management.

For ultrasound departments of various types at various levels, the Ultrasonic Medical Quality Control Center of Liaoning Province has issued ultrasonic quality baseline survey forms in March 2021. The investigation period was from January 1 to December 31, 2020. The contents included general information of sonographers, examining items conducted, the average number of ultrasound examinations per year, the ratio of the number of sonographers to the number of diagnostic equipment, ultrasound appointment time for an inpatient examination, the number of critical value report, the positive rate of ultrasonic report, the coincidence rate of ultrasound diagnosis, etc. The ultrasonic quality control indicators in hospitals of different levels were compared by chi-square test or one-way ANOVA.

The questionnaires were returned from 141 hospitals in 14 prefecture-level cities in Liaoning Province, including 48 tertiary grade A hospitals, 20 tertiary grade B hospitals, 42 secondary grade A hospitals, 5 secondary grade B hospitals, and 26 other hospitals. There existed a significant difference in the average number of sonographers and their age (＞45 years old), titles (senior and junior titles), and education background in hospitals at different levels (P＜0.05). The differences in the ultrasound examination number of outpatients, emergency room visits, physical examinations, and inpatient numbers at various levels of hospitals were statistically significant (P＜0.05). The number of examinations performed is highest in tertiary grade A hospitals and lowest in secondary grade B hospitals. Besides, hospitals at all levels showed a significant differences in the average ultrasound appointment time for inpatients (P＜0.05). Among the quality control indicators of ultrasound examination, the difference in the positive rate of ultrasound reports in hospitals at various levels was statistically significant (P＜0.05), with the positive rate of ultrasound reports in tertiary grade A hospitals being the highest [(78.3±23.6)%]; in terms of the coincidence rate of ultrasound diagnosis among hospitals at various levels, the difference was statistically significant (P＜0.05). The coincidence rate of ultrasound diagnosis in secondary grade B hospitals [(65.6±11.2)%] was significantly lower than those of other hospitals.

There are obvious differences in many quality control indicators in the ultrasound department of hospitals at various levels in Liaoning Province. The Ultrasonic Medical Quality Control Center should formulate relevant quality control policies and carry out relevant quality control work based on the baseline survey results, so as to facilitate the normalization, standardization, and homogenization of ultrasound diagnosis and treatment in Liaoning Province.