RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The barriers to comprehensive abortion care in Australian metropolitan tertiary hospitals are under-researched. Previous work has suggested that negative practitioner attitudes and lack of training may play a large role; however, this remains poorly understood. AIM: The aim was to survey doctors practicing obstetrics and gynaecology to better understand their views, training experience and confidence in abortion care. METHOD: The method involved a cross-sectional study via an anonymous survey at a single metropolitan tertiary hospital not providing substantive abortion services in Melbourne, Australia. Inclusion criterion was obstetric and gynaecology medical staff working at that hospital. Data were collected regarding views, training experiences and confidence in first-trimester medical and surgical abortion, and second-trimester surgical abortion. Data were analysed according to levels of training, categorised as RANZCOG (Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists) Fellows, prevocational/vocational trainees and general practitioner specialists. RESULTS: Sixty-one valid responses were received from 90 eligible participants (response rate 68%). An overwhelming majority (96%) supported abortion services. The majority of RANZCOG Fellows felt confident performing first-trimester surgical abortion (89%) and first-trimester medical abortion (71%); however, only half felt confident performing second-trimester surgical abortion (50%). Prevocational/vocational trainees were overall less confident but overwhelmingly expressed interest in gaining further experience in abortion. CONCLUSION: Doctors are generally confident in providing first-trimester abortion services (medical or surgical) in the metropolitan tertiary setting. However, further work is required to understand ongoing barriers to comprehensive abortion care. There may also be a skills shortage for second-trimester surgical abortion, requiring significant improvements in abortion training.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In response to the challenges of assessing fetal growth in obese women, guidelines recommend routine third trimester ultrasound scans. AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance of this routine scan in obese women (body mass index (BMI) ≥ 35 kg/m2 ). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 1008 pregnancies with maternal BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2 born after 37 weeks gestation at a Victorian hospital from 2015 to 2017. Multiple pregnancies and those affected by diabetes were excluded. Growth ultrasounds were performed between 34 + 0 and 36 + 6 weeks gestation. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for the detection of large for gestational age (LGA > 90%) and small for gestational age (SGA < 10%) were calculated using ultrasound estimated fetal weight (EFW) or abdominal circumference (AC) and compared with gestational age and gender-based birthweight percentiles. RESULTS: Using EFW, sensitivity for detecting SGA at birth was 8.1% (six of 74) with a PPV of 100%. Sensitivity for detecting LGA at birth was 61.0% (119 of 195), PPV 54.8%. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV percentages were all lower using AC. Only 40% of actual birthweight percentiles (405/1008) were within ±10 percentiles of their growth ultrasound EFW percentile. CONCLUSION: The performance of a routine third trimester ultrasound in women with BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2 suggests limited utility in helping identify aberrant fetal growth. This has important implications for the management of obese pregnant women.