16/03/2026
https://www.facebook.com/share/1GhVyNbUwJ/
2025 2nd Edition – Annual Summary Reports Published & NCHDA Methodology.
Why can’t the public have a “good grasp” on individual centre detection rates too? Why do families continue to have access only to broad reporting statistics by NICOR either by region, ICS, ICB or STP? There are still multiple trusts in an ICS and as far as we can tell - NICOR previously reported on PPD detection rates by ICS. We seem to have gone full circle.
Relevant extract;
“There are evidently a large number of regions who have scope for considerable improvement in detection rates. However, of importance is that most regions have many local screening
centres sited within them, especially highly populated ones, such as the Thames Valley and London, with likely important centre-level variation in diagnostic rates within a region.
Going forwards the NCHDA is planning to move away from regional reporting in England to reporting antenatal detection rates along the geographic boundaries of Sustainability and Transformation Partnerships (STPs) and Integrated Care Systems (ICSs). Individual centres, however, should have a good grasp of how successful they are and be alerted of missed cases, mostly via links through their local fetal and paediatric cardiologist”.
Please just tell us who the poorer trusts or "centres" are. We'd like to know if there is correlation with those trusts that don't keep fetal cardiac records @ 20 weeks