Developing criteria for Cesarean Section using the RAND appropriateness method

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Cesarean section rates are increasing worldwide, and a rapid increase has been observed in Iran. Disagreement exists between clinicians about when to use cesarean section. We aimed to identify the appropriateness criteria for the use of cesarean section in Iran.</p> <p>Method</p> <p>A consensus development study using a modified version of the RAND Appropriateness Method (RAM). We generated scenarios from valid clinical guidelines and expert opinions. A panel of experts participated in consensus development: first round via mail (12 members), second round face-to-face (9 members). We followed the RAM recommendations for the development of the scenario lists, rating scales, and statistical analyses.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>294 scenarios relevant to cesarean section were identified. 191 scenarios were considered appropriate, of which 125 scenarios were agreed upon. The panel found cesarean inappropriate for 21% of scenarios, and 'equivocal' for 14% of scenarios.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>RAM is useful for identifying stakeholder views in settings with limited resources. The participants' views on appropriateness of certain indications differed with available evidence. A large number of scenarios without agreement may partly explain why it has been difficult to curb the growth in cesarean section rate.</p

Management of abnormal uterine bleeding by northern, rural and isolated primary care physicians: PART I – How are we doing?

BACKGROUND: Canadian hysterectomy rates have declined in recent years. However, hysterectomy rates for discretionary indications, principally abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB), remain high in some regions. In northern Ontario, hysterectomy rates for women aged 34–45 are almost triple the rates in southern, urban areas. Primary care physicians (family doctors) usually manage AUB initially in these northern areas where a severe shortage of gynecologists exists. METHODS: We surveyed 194 family physicians in northern Ontario with a case scenario of a pre-menopausal woman with heavy vaginal bleeding to characterize management and to gain physicians' perspectives on the factors that affect it. RESULTS: To investigate her heavy vaginal bleeding, only 17% of physicians recommended a pelvic examination for the woman in our case scenario. Most physicians advocated a course of medical therapy before referral to a gynecologist, for whom the average waiting time was seven weeks. However, most physicians recommended referral after only one failed trial of medical treatment. Physicians felt that major deterrents to medical treatments were patient desires for immediate relief and/or permanent solutions, poor patient compliance and the high cost of medication. Only 25% of respondents indicated that they would perform an endometrial biopsy prior to referral. CONCLUSIONS: Family physicians would benefit from further education on appropriate investigations for AUB, primarily training in pelvic examination and endometrial biopsy techniques, as well as appropriate treatment algorithms. Further research into patient perspectives on treatment options is needed

Management of abnormal uterine bleeding by northern, rural and isolated primary care physicians: PART II: What do we need?

BACKGROUND: Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) is a common problem that affects one in five women during the pre-menopausal years. It is frequently managed by family physicians, especially in northern, rural and isolated areas where severe shortages of gynecologists exist. METHODS: We surveyed 194 family physicians in northern, rural and isolated areas of Ontario, Canada to determine their educational and resource needs for the management of AUB, with a specific focus on the relevance and feasibility of using clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). RESULTS: Most physicians surveyed did not use CPGs for the management of AUB because they did not know that such guidelines existed. The majority were interested in further education on the management of AUB through mailed CPGs and locally held training courses. A major theme among respondents was the need for more timely and effective gynecological referrals. CONCLUSION: A one-page diagnostic and treatment algorithm for AUB would be easy to use and would place minimal restrictions on physician autonomy. As the majority of physicians had Internet access, we recommend emailing and web posting in addition to mailing this algorithm. Local, hands-on courses including options for endometrial biopsy training would also be helpful for northern, rural and isolated physicians, many of whom cannot readily take time away from their practices

Inadequate prenatal care and its association with adverse pregnancy outcomes: A comparison of indices

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The objectives of this study were to determine rates of prenatal care utilization in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada from 1991 to 2000; to compare two indices of prenatal care utilization in identifying the proportion of the population receiving inadequate prenatal care; to determine the association between inadequate prenatal care and adverse pregnancy outcomes (preterm birth, low birth weight [LBW], and small-for-gestational age [SGA]), using each of the indices; and, to assess whether or not, and to what extent, gestational age modifies this association.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a population-based study of women having a hospital-based singleton live birth from 1991 to 2000 (N = 80,989). Data sources consisted of a linked mother-baby database and a physician claims file maintained by Manitoba Health. Rates of inadequate prenatal care were calculated using two indices, the R-GINDEX and the APNCU. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine the association between inadequate prenatal care and adverse pregnancy outcomes. Stratified analysis was then used to determine whether the association between inadequate prenatal care and LBW or SGA differed by gestational age.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Rates of inadequate/no prenatal care ranged from 8.3% using APNCU to 8.9% using R-GINDEX. The association between inadequate prenatal care and preterm birth and LBW varied depending on the index used, with adjusted odds ratios (AOR) ranging from 1.0 to 1.3. In contrast, both indices revealed the same strength of association of inadequate prenatal care with SGA (AOR 1.4). Both indices demonstrated heterogeneity (non-uniformity) across gestational age strata, indicating the presence of effect modification by gestational age.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Selection of a prenatal care utilization index requires careful consideration of its methodological underpinnings and limitations. The two indices compared in this study revealed different patterns of utilization of prenatal care, and should not be used interchangeably. Use of these indices to study the association between utilization of prenatal care and pregnancy outcomes affected by the duration of pregnancy should be approached cautiously.</p

Visual inspection with acetic acid as a cervical cancer test: accuracy validated using latent class analysis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The purpose of this study was to validate the accuracy of an alternative cervical cancer test – visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) – by addressing possible imperfections in the gold standard through latent class analysis (LCA). The data were originally collected at peri-urban health clinics in Zimbabwe.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Conventional accuracy (sensitivity/specificity) estimates for VIA and two other screening tests using colposcopy/biopsy as the reference standard were compared to LCA estimates based on results from all four tests. For conventional analysis, negative colposcopy was accepted as a negative outcome when biopsy was not available as the reference standard. With LCA, local dependencies between tests were handled through adding direct effect parameters or additional latent classes to the model.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Two models yielded good fit to the data, a 2-class model with two adjustments and a 3-class model with one adjustment. The definition of latent disease associated with the latter was more stringent, backed by three of the four tests. Under that model, sensitivity for VIA (abnormal+) was 0.74 compared to 0.78 with conventional analyses. Specificity was 0.639 versus 0.568, respectively. By contrast, the LCA-derived sensitivity for colposcopy/biopsy was 0.63.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>VIA sensitivity and specificity with the 3-class LCA model were within the range of published data and relatively consistent with conventional analyses, thus validating the original assessment of test accuracy. LCA probably yielded more likely estimates of the true accuracy than did conventional analysis with in-country colposcopy/biopsy as the reference standard. Colpscopy with biopsy can be problematic as a study reference standard and LCA offers the possibility of obtaining estimates adjusted for referent imperfections.</p

Birth after caesarean study – planned vaginal birth or planned elective repeat caesarean for women at term with a single previous caesarean birth: protocol for a patient preference study and randomised trial

Background: For women who have a caesarean section in their preceding pregnancy, two care policies for birth are considered standard: planned vaginal birth and planned elective repeat caesarean. Currently available information about the benefits and harms of both forms of care are derived from retrospective and prospective cohort studies. There have been no randomised trials, and recognising the deficiencies in the literature, there have been calls for methodologically rigorous studies to assess maternal and infant health outcomes associated with both care policies. The aims of our study are to assess in women with a previous caesarean birth, who are eligible in the subsequent pregnancy for a vaginal birth, whether a policy of planned vaginal birth after caesarean compared with a policy of planned repeat caesarean affects the risk of serious complications for the woman and her infant. Methods/Design Design: Multicentred patient preference study and a randomised clinical trial. Inclusion Criteria: Women with a single prior caesarean presenting in their next pregnancy with a single, live fetus in cephalic presentation, who have reached 37 weeks gestation, and who do not have a contraindication to a planned VBAC. Trial Entry & Randomisation: Eligible women will be given an information sheet during pregnancy, and will be recruited to the study from 37 weeks gestation after an obstetrician has confirmed eligibility for a planned vaginal birth. Written informed consent will be obtained. Women who consent to the patient preference study will be allocated their preference for either planned VBAC or planned, elective repeat caesarean. Women who consent to the randomised trial will be randomly allocated to either the planned vaginal birth after caesarean or planned elective repeat caesarean group. Treatment Groups: Women in the planned vaginal birth group will await spontaneous onset of labour whilst appropriate. Women in the elective repeat caesarean group will have this scheduled for between 38 and 40 weeks. Primary Study Outcome: Serious adverse infant outcome (death or serious morbidity). Sample Size: 2314 women in the patient preference study to show a difference in adverse neonatal outcome from 1.6% to 3.6% (p = 0.05, 80% power).Jodie M Dodd, Caroline A Crowther, Janet E Hiller, Ross R Haslam and Jeffrey S Robinso

Urban women's socioeconomic status, health service needs and utilization in the four weeks after postpartum hospital discharge: findings of a Canadian cross-sectional survey

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Postpartum women who experience socioeconomic disadvantage are at higher risk for poor health outcomes than more advantaged postpartum women, and may benefit from access to community based postpartum health services. This study examined socioeconomically disadvantaged (SED) postpartum women's health, and health service needs and utilization patterns in the first four weeks post hospital discharge, and compared them to more socioeconomically advantaged (SEA) postpartum women's health, health service needs and utilization patterns.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data collected as part of a large Ontario cross-sectional mother-infant survey were analyzed. Women (N = 1000) who had uncomplicated vaginal births of single 'at-term' infants at four hospitals in two large southern Ontario, Canada cities were stratified into SED and SEA groups based on income, social support and a universally administered hospital postpartum risk screen. Participants completed a self-administered questionnaire before hospital discharge and a telephone interview four weeks after discharge. Main outcome measures were self-reported health status, symptoms of postpartum depression, postpartum service needs and health service use.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>When compared to the SEA women, the SED women were more likely to be discharged from hospital within the first 24 hours after giving birth [OR 1.49, 95% CI (1.01–2.18)], less likely to report very good or excellent health [OR 0.48, 95% CI (0.35–0.67)], and had higher rates of symptoms of postpartum depression [OR 2.7, 95% CI(1.64–4.4)]. No differences were found between groups in relation to self reported need for and ability to access services for physical and mental health needs, or in use of physicians, walk-in clinics and emergency departments. The SED group were more likely to accept public health nurse home visits [OR 2.24, 95% CI(1.47–3.40)].</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Although SED women experienced poorer mental and overall health they reported similar health service needs and utilization patterns to more SEA women. The results can assist policy makers, health service planners and providers to develop and implement necessary and accessible services. Further research is needed to evaluate SED postpartum women's health service needs and barriers to service use.</p

Developing and pre-testing a decision board to facilitate informed choice about delivery approach in uncomplicated pregnancy

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The rate of caesarean sections is increasing worldwide, yet medical literature informing women with uncomplicated pregnancies about relative risks and benefits of elective caesarean section (CS) compared with vaginal delivery (VD) remains scarce. A decision board may address this gap, providing systematic evidence-based information so that patients can more fully understand their treatment options. The objective of our study was to design and pre-test a decision board to guide clinical discussions and enhance informed decision-making related to delivery approach (CS or VD) in uncomplicated pregnancy.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Development of the decision board involved two preliminary studies to determine women's preferred mode of risk presentation and a systematic literature review for the most comprehensive presentation of medical risks at the time (VD and CS). Forty women were recruited to pre-test the tool. Eligible subjects were of childbearing age (18-40 years) but were not pregnant in order to avoid raising the expectation among pregnant women that CS was a universally available birth option. Women selected their preferred delivery approach and completed the Decisional Conflict Scale to measure decisional uncertainty before and after reviewing the decision board. They also answered open-ended questions reflecting what they had learned, whether or not the information had helped them to choose between birth methods, and additional information that should be included. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse sample characteristics and women's choice of delivery approach pre/post decision board. Change in decisional conflict was measured using Wilcoxon's sign rank test for each of the three subscales.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The majority of women reported that they had learned something new (n = 37, 92%) and that the tool had helped them make a hypothetical choice between delivery approaches (n = 34, 85%). Women wanted more information about neonatal risks and personal experiences. Decisional uncertainty decreased (p < 0.001) and perceived effectiveness of decisions increased (p < 0.001) post-intervention.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Non-pregnant women of childbearing age were positive about the decision board and stated their hypothetical delivery choices were informed by risk presentation, but wanted additional information about benefits and experiences. This study represents a preliminary but integral step towards ensuring women considering delivery approaches in uncomplicated pregnancies are fully informed.</p