Cross-sectional survey reveals barriers to antenatal ultrasound accreditation among Australian rural clinicians, highlighting training needs.
Objective To explore the perceptions of rural Australian clinicians towards antenatal point‐of‐care ultrasound (APoCUS) training and accreditation, investigating barriers and enablers to continuing professional development (CPD). Methods A prospective cross‐sectional online survey of rural Australian clinicians (doctors, nurses, midwives) was undertaken in 2023, using non‐probability sampling with self‐selection/voluntary response. The survey targeted rural clinicians caring for pregnant patients. Thematic and descriptive analyses were performed with response frequencies grouped by role, work sector, APoCUS use and previous training experience. Fisher's exact test was used for association. Results Fifty‐seven responses were analysed (41 midwives/nurses, 16 physicians/doctors). Two‐thirds were performing APoCUS, half reported formal or on‐the‐job training, and none were accredited. Midwives/nurses had a poorer understanding of their scope of practice (eligibility to learn/perform APoCUS) and accreditation requirements. Interest in accreditation was high, particularly for the midwife/nurse cohort. The perceived benefits of accreditation surrounded improved patient care and services, scanning capability and professional satisfaction. The main barriers to pursuing accreditation were supervision for scanning and assessments, cost, time commitment and workforce shortages. Half of the respondents had access to employer‐provided CPD funds, and most reported having to self‐fund to meet professional registration requirements. Conclusion Australian rural clinicians are driven to upskill and provide high‐quality care to patients but face significant barriers to CPD and attaining accreditation, evidenced by low accreditation rates. Future efforts should focus on simplifying accreditation processes, improving access to qualified supervisors/mentors and raising awareness of training and accreditation opportunities while providing support and incentives for rural clinicians to facilitate access.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bidner et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: