User login
Immediate postpartum LARC: ‘Agony and ecstasy’
NASHVILLE, TENN. – according to Eve Espey, MD.
“I think [the rate] is going to settle out at around 15%-20%, but good cost-effectiveness studies show that, even if it were that high, it is still highly cost effective,” she said during an update on contraceptives at the annual clinical and scientific meeting of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
Immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraception (LARC), including an IUD or implant, may reduce rapid-repeat pregnancy, she added, noting, however, that while Medicaid is covering it in many states, “it turns out that payment models are very cumbersome; they actually don’t work very well.”
At the University of New Mexico (UNM) in Albuquerque, where Dr .Espey is a professor and chair of the department of obstetrics and gynecology and director of the family planning fellowship, immediate postpartum LARC is offered to women with Medicaid coverage, and payment is received in about 97% of cases.
It took about 4 years of persistent effort to make that happen, she said, adding that the UNM Hospital still is the only one in the state offering the service, although efforts are underway to help other hospitals “troubleshoot the issues.”
Another challenge is the lack of private insurance coverage for immediate postpartum LARC, she said.
“I was super enthusiastic about this a few years ago, and I remain super enthusiastic about it, but I think it’s going to take another 5 years or so [for better coverage], and honestly I think what we really need is an inpatient LARC CPT code to make this happen.”
In this video interview, Dr. Espey discusses the “agony and ecstasy” of immediate postpartum LARC, summarizing the main points regarding its benefits and challenges as presented during an “EdTalk” she gave at the meeting.
Dr. Espey reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
NASHVILLE, TENN. – according to Eve Espey, MD.
“I think [the rate] is going to settle out at around 15%-20%, but good cost-effectiveness studies show that, even if it were that high, it is still highly cost effective,” she said during an update on contraceptives at the annual clinical and scientific meeting of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
Immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraception (LARC), including an IUD or implant, may reduce rapid-repeat pregnancy, she added, noting, however, that while Medicaid is covering it in many states, “it turns out that payment models are very cumbersome; they actually don’t work very well.”
At the University of New Mexico (UNM) in Albuquerque, where Dr .Espey is a professor and chair of the department of obstetrics and gynecology and director of the family planning fellowship, immediate postpartum LARC is offered to women with Medicaid coverage, and payment is received in about 97% of cases.
It took about 4 years of persistent effort to make that happen, she said, adding that the UNM Hospital still is the only one in the state offering the service, although efforts are underway to help other hospitals “troubleshoot the issues.”
Another challenge is the lack of private insurance coverage for immediate postpartum LARC, she said.
“I was super enthusiastic about this a few years ago, and I remain super enthusiastic about it, but I think it’s going to take another 5 years or so [for better coverage], and honestly I think what we really need is an inpatient LARC CPT code to make this happen.”
In this video interview, Dr. Espey discusses the “agony and ecstasy” of immediate postpartum LARC, summarizing the main points regarding its benefits and challenges as presented during an “EdTalk” she gave at the meeting.
Dr. Espey reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
NASHVILLE, TENN. – according to Eve Espey, MD.
“I think [the rate] is going to settle out at around 15%-20%, but good cost-effectiveness studies show that, even if it were that high, it is still highly cost effective,” she said during an update on contraceptives at the annual clinical and scientific meeting of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
Immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraception (LARC), including an IUD or implant, may reduce rapid-repeat pregnancy, she added, noting, however, that while Medicaid is covering it in many states, “it turns out that payment models are very cumbersome; they actually don’t work very well.”
At the University of New Mexico (UNM) in Albuquerque, where Dr .Espey is a professor and chair of the department of obstetrics and gynecology and director of the family planning fellowship, immediate postpartum LARC is offered to women with Medicaid coverage, and payment is received in about 97% of cases.
It took about 4 years of persistent effort to make that happen, she said, adding that the UNM Hospital still is the only one in the state offering the service, although efforts are underway to help other hospitals “troubleshoot the issues.”
Another challenge is the lack of private insurance coverage for immediate postpartum LARC, she said.
“I was super enthusiastic about this a few years ago, and I remain super enthusiastic about it, but I think it’s going to take another 5 years or so [for better coverage], and honestly I think what we really need is an inpatient LARC CPT code to make this happen.”
In this video interview, Dr. Espey discusses the “agony and ecstasy” of immediate postpartum LARC, summarizing the main points regarding its benefits and challenges as presented during an “EdTalk” she gave at the meeting.
Dr. Espey reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM ACOG 2019
Antiabortion measures may lead to Supreme Court showdown
The debate over abortion rights could be headed to the U.S. Supreme Court after two recent state measures that aim to restrict access to abortion.
On May 7, 2019, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp (R) signed into law a statute that bars physicians from performing an abortion after a heartbeat is detected – usually at about 6 weeks of pregnancy. The law allows exceptions if the pregnancy poses death or serious harm to the woman, and in cases of rape or incest.
A week later, the Alabama Senate on May 14 approved a measure that would ban abortion at every pregnancy stage and penalize physicians with a Class A felony for performing an abortion and charge them with a Class C felony for attempting to perform an abortion. The Alabama bill includes an exception if a woman’s life is at risk, but not for cases of rape or incest. Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey (R) signed the bill into law on May 15.
Both measures will likely be challenged in court; the Alabama law, in particular, could land in front of the U.S. Supreme Court as a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade.
Abortion critics have been encouraged by the Supreme Court appointment of right-leaning Associate Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh and hope the Alabama measure will drive the Supreme Court to reconsider its central holding in Roe, according to Fatima Goss Graves, president of the National Women’s Law Center, a liberal-leaning legal firm that advocates gender equality.
“After decades of chipping away at Roe, antiabortion legislators and advocates are feeling emboldened with the addition of Justice Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court and they are exposing their true goal – to ban abortion altogether,” Ms. Graves said in a statement. “And make no mistake, [passage of the Alabama bill] is extreme overreach: The vast majority of people in this country do not support criminalizing women or doctors and want abortion to be safe and legal.”
National antiabortion group Susan B. Anthony List called Alabama’s measure a landmark victory and indicated that the bill passage may ultimately change the outcome of Roe v. Wade.
“Across the nation there is growing momentum, informed by science and compassion, and spurred on in reaction to abortion extremism in New York and Virginia, to recognize the humanity of the unborn child in the law,” Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a statement. “It is clearer than ever that Roe is far from being settled law in the eyes and hearts of the American people, and this is increasingly reflected in state legislatures. ... The time is coming for the Supreme Court to let that debate go forward.”
Other states have recently passed laws similar to Georgia’s measure, dubbed the “fetal heartbeat bills,” including Kentucky, Mississippi, and Ohio.
On May 15, the American Civil Liberties Union and Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio issued a joint legal challenge against Ohio’s law, calling it blatantly unconstitutional. Meanwhile, the Center for Reproductive Rights has pledged to sue Georgia over its law.
Ted Anderson, MD, president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said the many recent restrictions to abortion access across the country are harmful to women’s health and detrimental to the physician-patient relationship.
“Lawmakers must support health policies based on sound science and evidence. Politicians must seek to improve access to care, not restrict it,” Dr. Anderson said in a statement. “Legislative restrictions fundamentally interfere with the patient-provider relationship and decrease access to necessary care for all women, and particularly for low-income women and those living long distances from health care providers. Health care decisions should be made jointly only by patients and their trusted health care professionals, not by politicians.”
The debate over abortion rights could be headed to the U.S. Supreme Court after two recent state measures that aim to restrict access to abortion.
On May 7, 2019, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp (R) signed into law a statute that bars physicians from performing an abortion after a heartbeat is detected – usually at about 6 weeks of pregnancy. The law allows exceptions if the pregnancy poses death or serious harm to the woman, and in cases of rape or incest.
A week later, the Alabama Senate on May 14 approved a measure that would ban abortion at every pregnancy stage and penalize physicians with a Class A felony for performing an abortion and charge them with a Class C felony for attempting to perform an abortion. The Alabama bill includes an exception if a woman’s life is at risk, but not for cases of rape or incest. Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey (R) signed the bill into law on May 15.
Both measures will likely be challenged in court; the Alabama law, in particular, could land in front of the U.S. Supreme Court as a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade.
Abortion critics have been encouraged by the Supreme Court appointment of right-leaning Associate Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh and hope the Alabama measure will drive the Supreme Court to reconsider its central holding in Roe, according to Fatima Goss Graves, president of the National Women’s Law Center, a liberal-leaning legal firm that advocates gender equality.
“After decades of chipping away at Roe, antiabortion legislators and advocates are feeling emboldened with the addition of Justice Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court and they are exposing their true goal – to ban abortion altogether,” Ms. Graves said in a statement. “And make no mistake, [passage of the Alabama bill] is extreme overreach: The vast majority of people in this country do not support criminalizing women or doctors and want abortion to be safe and legal.”
National antiabortion group Susan B. Anthony List called Alabama’s measure a landmark victory and indicated that the bill passage may ultimately change the outcome of Roe v. Wade.
“Across the nation there is growing momentum, informed by science and compassion, and spurred on in reaction to abortion extremism in New York and Virginia, to recognize the humanity of the unborn child in the law,” Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a statement. “It is clearer than ever that Roe is far from being settled law in the eyes and hearts of the American people, and this is increasingly reflected in state legislatures. ... The time is coming for the Supreme Court to let that debate go forward.”
Other states have recently passed laws similar to Georgia’s measure, dubbed the “fetal heartbeat bills,” including Kentucky, Mississippi, and Ohio.
On May 15, the American Civil Liberties Union and Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio issued a joint legal challenge against Ohio’s law, calling it blatantly unconstitutional. Meanwhile, the Center for Reproductive Rights has pledged to sue Georgia over its law.
Ted Anderson, MD, president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said the many recent restrictions to abortion access across the country are harmful to women’s health and detrimental to the physician-patient relationship.
“Lawmakers must support health policies based on sound science and evidence. Politicians must seek to improve access to care, not restrict it,” Dr. Anderson said in a statement. “Legislative restrictions fundamentally interfere with the patient-provider relationship and decrease access to necessary care for all women, and particularly for low-income women and those living long distances from health care providers. Health care decisions should be made jointly only by patients and their trusted health care professionals, not by politicians.”
The debate over abortion rights could be headed to the U.S. Supreme Court after two recent state measures that aim to restrict access to abortion.
On May 7, 2019, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp (R) signed into law a statute that bars physicians from performing an abortion after a heartbeat is detected – usually at about 6 weeks of pregnancy. The law allows exceptions if the pregnancy poses death or serious harm to the woman, and in cases of rape or incest.
A week later, the Alabama Senate on May 14 approved a measure that would ban abortion at every pregnancy stage and penalize physicians with a Class A felony for performing an abortion and charge them with a Class C felony for attempting to perform an abortion. The Alabama bill includes an exception if a woman’s life is at risk, but not for cases of rape or incest. Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey (R) signed the bill into law on May 15.
Both measures will likely be challenged in court; the Alabama law, in particular, could land in front of the U.S. Supreme Court as a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade.
Abortion critics have been encouraged by the Supreme Court appointment of right-leaning Associate Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh and hope the Alabama measure will drive the Supreme Court to reconsider its central holding in Roe, according to Fatima Goss Graves, president of the National Women’s Law Center, a liberal-leaning legal firm that advocates gender equality.
“After decades of chipping away at Roe, antiabortion legislators and advocates are feeling emboldened with the addition of Justice Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court and they are exposing their true goal – to ban abortion altogether,” Ms. Graves said in a statement. “And make no mistake, [passage of the Alabama bill] is extreme overreach: The vast majority of people in this country do not support criminalizing women or doctors and want abortion to be safe and legal.”
National antiabortion group Susan B. Anthony List called Alabama’s measure a landmark victory and indicated that the bill passage may ultimately change the outcome of Roe v. Wade.
“Across the nation there is growing momentum, informed by science and compassion, and spurred on in reaction to abortion extremism in New York and Virginia, to recognize the humanity of the unborn child in the law,” Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a statement. “It is clearer than ever that Roe is far from being settled law in the eyes and hearts of the American people, and this is increasingly reflected in state legislatures. ... The time is coming for the Supreme Court to let that debate go forward.”
Other states have recently passed laws similar to Georgia’s measure, dubbed the “fetal heartbeat bills,” including Kentucky, Mississippi, and Ohio.
On May 15, the American Civil Liberties Union and Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio issued a joint legal challenge against Ohio’s law, calling it blatantly unconstitutional. Meanwhile, the Center for Reproductive Rights has pledged to sue Georgia over its law.
Ted Anderson, MD, president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said the many recent restrictions to abortion access across the country are harmful to women’s health and detrimental to the physician-patient relationship.
“Lawmakers must support health policies based on sound science and evidence. Politicians must seek to improve access to care, not restrict it,” Dr. Anderson said in a statement. “Legislative restrictions fundamentally interfere with the patient-provider relationship and decrease access to necessary care for all women, and particularly for low-income women and those living long distances from health care providers. Health care decisions should be made jointly only by patients and their trusted health care professionals, not by politicians.”
Study finds link between intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy and risk of NAFLD
Patients with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (ICP) were nearly six times more likely to have a diagnosis of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) than were controls, results from a retrospective, single-center study demonstrated.
“If this connection is confirmed with future studies, intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy may prove a novel model through which to investigate bile acid metabolism in patients with fatty liver disease,” one of the study authors, Tatyana Kushner, MD, MSCE, said during a media briefing in advance of the annual Digestive Disease Week. “This could have implications for future management of fatty liver disease. Additionally, these findings suggest that ICP patients should be seen by a liver specialist because they may go on to develop chronic liver disease or may already have already existing underlying liver disease.”
ICP is characterized by a build-up of bile acids during pregnancy and is associated with an increased risk of negative fetal outcomes and fetal death if left untreated, said Dr. Kushner, of the division of liver diseases at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York. The most notable symptom during pregnancy is severe pruritus. In what is believed to be the first study of its kind, Dr. Kushner and colleagues set out to evaluate the association between ICP and NAFLD and associated metabolic risk factors, including obesity, dyslipidemia, hypertension, and diabetes. Between January and December of 2017, they drew from the electronic medical records of a New York City health system to identify 149 pregnancies complicated by ICP and compared them to a control group of 200 pregnancies without an ICP diagnosis. The researchers used Pearson’s chi-square or Fisher’s exact test and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests to evaluate association of ICP with categorical variables and continuous variables, respectively, and unadjusted odds ratios to compare the ICP and control groups for clinically significant outcomes.
The median age of the study population was 30 years, their mean body mass index was 27.5 kg/m2, and there was a higher proportion of Hispanic women in the ICP group, compared with the control group (75% vs. 62%, respectively). Dr. Kushner and colleagues found that Hispanic women were nearly twice as likely to be diagnosed with ICP than non-Hispanic women (OR, 1.90; 95% confidence interval, 1.87-3.03). However, patients in both the ICP and control groups were similar for median age (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.99-1.06), nulliparity (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.48-1.30), and prevalence of hepatitis C (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.08-21.67). The two groups were also similar for certain metabolic risk factors, including prevalence of obesity (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.62-1.61), hypertension (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.31-1.52), hemoglobin A1c greater than 5.5% (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.34-1.9), and total cholesterol above 200 mg/dL (OR, 4.15; 95% CI, 0.83-20.84). Median bile acid levels were 30.6 micromoles (interquartile range, 11.6, 32.7) in the ICP group.
Compared with patients in the control group, those in the ICP group had higher median levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) (32 vs. 16 U/L; P less than .0001), alkaline phosphatase (181 vs. 128 U/L; P less than .0001), and total bilirubin (0.5 vs. 0.35 mg/dL; P less than .0001). ICP patients were also more likely than their counterparts to have ALT levels above 50 U/L (two times the upper limit of normal; OR, 3.22; 95% CI, 1.48-7.03), a history of biliary disease (OR, 3.29; 95% CI, 1.39-7.80), and to have evidence of steatosis on liver imaging (OR, 4.69; 95% CI, 1.68-13.12). When the researchers evaluated a diagnosis of NAFLD based on ICD-10 codes or evidence of steatosis on liver imaging, ICP patients were significantly more likely to have a diagnosis of NAFLD than controls (OR, 5.7; 95% CI, 2.08-15.65).
“We recommend additional research to look at differences in NAFLD progression in women who had NAFLD and were later diagnosed with ICP, compared to women with NAFLD who did not go on to develop ICP, because that may be a reflection of the role that bile acid metabolism plays in these particular patients,” Dr. Kushner said.
Digestive Disease Week is jointly sponsored by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), and the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract (SSAT).
The study’s primary author was Erica Monrose, MD. The researchers reported having no financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Monrose E et al. DDW 2019, Abstract Sa1562.
Patients with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (ICP) were nearly six times more likely to have a diagnosis of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) than were controls, results from a retrospective, single-center study demonstrated.
“If this connection is confirmed with future studies, intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy may prove a novel model through which to investigate bile acid metabolism in patients with fatty liver disease,” one of the study authors, Tatyana Kushner, MD, MSCE, said during a media briefing in advance of the annual Digestive Disease Week. “This could have implications for future management of fatty liver disease. Additionally, these findings suggest that ICP patients should be seen by a liver specialist because they may go on to develop chronic liver disease or may already have already existing underlying liver disease.”
ICP is characterized by a build-up of bile acids during pregnancy and is associated with an increased risk of negative fetal outcomes and fetal death if left untreated, said Dr. Kushner, of the division of liver diseases at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York. The most notable symptom during pregnancy is severe pruritus. In what is believed to be the first study of its kind, Dr. Kushner and colleagues set out to evaluate the association between ICP and NAFLD and associated metabolic risk factors, including obesity, dyslipidemia, hypertension, and diabetes. Between January and December of 2017, they drew from the electronic medical records of a New York City health system to identify 149 pregnancies complicated by ICP and compared them to a control group of 200 pregnancies without an ICP diagnosis. The researchers used Pearson’s chi-square or Fisher’s exact test and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests to evaluate association of ICP with categorical variables and continuous variables, respectively, and unadjusted odds ratios to compare the ICP and control groups for clinically significant outcomes.
The median age of the study population was 30 years, their mean body mass index was 27.5 kg/m2, and there was a higher proportion of Hispanic women in the ICP group, compared with the control group (75% vs. 62%, respectively). Dr. Kushner and colleagues found that Hispanic women were nearly twice as likely to be diagnosed with ICP than non-Hispanic women (OR, 1.90; 95% confidence interval, 1.87-3.03). However, patients in both the ICP and control groups were similar for median age (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.99-1.06), nulliparity (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.48-1.30), and prevalence of hepatitis C (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.08-21.67). The two groups were also similar for certain metabolic risk factors, including prevalence of obesity (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.62-1.61), hypertension (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.31-1.52), hemoglobin A1c greater than 5.5% (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.34-1.9), and total cholesterol above 200 mg/dL (OR, 4.15; 95% CI, 0.83-20.84). Median bile acid levels were 30.6 micromoles (interquartile range, 11.6, 32.7) in the ICP group.
Compared with patients in the control group, those in the ICP group had higher median levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) (32 vs. 16 U/L; P less than .0001), alkaline phosphatase (181 vs. 128 U/L; P less than .0001), and total bilirubin (0.5 vs. 0.35 mg/dL; P less than .0001). ICP patients were also more likely than their counterparts to have ALT levels above 50 U/L (two times the upper limit of normal; OR, 3.22; 95% CI, 1.48-7.03), a history of biliary disease (OR, 3.29; 95% CI, 1.39-7.80), and to have evidence of steatosis on liver imaging (OR, 4.69; 95% CI, 1.68-13.12). When the researchers evaluated a diagnosis of NAFLD based on ICD-10 codes or evidence of steatosis on liver imaging, ICP patients were significantly more likely to have a diagnosis of NAFLD than controls (OR, 5.7; 95% CI, 2.08-15.65).
“We recommend additional research to look at differences in NAFLD progression in women who had NAFLD and were later diagnosed with ICP, compared to women with NAFLD who did not go on to develop ICP, because that may be a reflection of the role that bile acid metabolism plays in these particular patients,” Dr. Kushner said.
Digestive Disease Week is jointly sponsored by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), and the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract (SSAT).
The study’s primary author was Erica Monrose, MD. The researchers reported having no financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Monrose E et al. DDW 2019, Abstract Sa1562.
Patients with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (ICP) were nearly six times more likely to have a diagnosis of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) than were controls, results from a retrospective, single-center study demonstrated.
“If this connection is confirmed with future studies, intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy may prove a novel model through which to investigate bile acid metabolism in patients with fatty liver disease,” one of the study authors, Tatyana Kushner, MD, MSCE, said during a media briefing in advance of the annual Digestive Disease Week. “This could have implications for future management of fatty liver disease. Additionally, these findings suggest that ICP patients should be seen by a liver specialist because they may go on to develop chronic liver disease or may already have already existing underlying liver disease.”
ICP is characterized by a build-up of bile acids during pregnancy and is associated with an increased risk of negative fetal outcomes and fetal death if left untreated, said Dr. Kushner, of the division of liver diseases at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York. The most notable symptom during pregnancy is severe pruritus. In what is believed to be the first study of its kind, Dr. Kushner and colleagues set out to evaluate the association between ICP and NAFLD and associated metabolic risk factors, including obesity, dyslipidemia, hypertension, and diabetes. Between January and December of 2017, they drew from the electronic medical records of a New York City health system to identify 149 pregnancies complicated by ICP and compared them to a control group of 200 pregnancies without an ICP diagnosis. The researchers used Pearson’s chi-square or Fisher’s exact test and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests to evaluate association of ICP with categorical variables and continuous variables, respectively, and unadjusted odds ratios to compare the ICP and control groups for clinically significant outcomes.
The median age of the study population was 30 years, their mean body mass index was 27.5 kg/m2, and there was a higher proportion of Hispanic women in the ICP group, compared with the control group (75% vs. 62%, respectively). Dr. Kushner and colleagues found that Hispanic women were nearly twice as likely to be diagnosed with ICP than non-Hispanic women (OR, 1.90; 95% confidence interval, 1.87-3.03). However, patients in both the ICP and control groups were similar for median age (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.99-1.06), nulliparity (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.48-1.30), and prevalence of hepatitis C (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.08-21.67). The two groups were also similar for certain metabolic risk factors, including prevalence of obesity (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.62-1.61), hypertension (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.31-1.52), hemoglobin A1c greater than 5.5% (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.34-1.9), and total cholesterol above 200 mg/dL (OR, 4.15; 95% CI, 0.83-20.84). Median bile acid levels were 30.6 micromoles (interquartile range, 11.6, 32.7) in the ICP group.
Compared with patients in the control group, those in the ICP group had higher median levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) (32 vs. 16 U/L; P less than .0001), alkaline phosphatase (181 vs. 128 U/L; P less than .0001), and total bilirubin (0.5 vs. 0.35 mg/dL; P less than .0001). ICP patients were also more likely than their counterparts to have ALT levels above 50 U/L (two times the upper limit of normal; OR, 3.22; 95% CI, 1.48-7.03), a history of biliary disease (OR, 3.29; 95% CI, 1.39-7.80), and to have evidence of steatosis on liver imaging (OR, 4.69; 95% CI, 1.68-13.12). When the researchers evaluated a diagnosis of NAFLD based on ICD-10 codes or evidence of steatosis on liver imaging, ICP patients were significantly more likely to have a diagnosis of NAFLD than controls (OR, 5.7; 95% CI, 2.08-15.65).
“We recommend additional research to look at differences in NAFLD progression in women who had NAFLD and were later diagnosed with ICP, compared to women with NAFLD who did not go on to develop ICP, because that may be a reflection of the role that bile acid metabolism plays in these particular patients,” Dr. Kushner said.
Digestive Disease Week is jointly sponsored by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), and the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract (SSAT).
The study’s primary author was Erica Monrose, MD. The researchers reported having no financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Monrose E et al. DDW 2019, Abstract Sa1562.
REPORTING FROM DDW 2019
C-sections play role in 300% higher severe maternal morbidity in twin pregnancies
according to findings from the prospective EPIMOMS study.
The population-based incidence of severe acute maternal morbidity occurring between 22 weeks’ of gestation and 42 days post partum in the 2012-2013 French multicenter study was 6.2% among 3,202 twin pregnancies and 1.3% among 179,107 singleton pregnancies, Hugo Madar, MD, MPH, of Bordeaux University Hospital, France, and colleagues reported on behalf of the EPIMOMS (Epidémiologie de la Morbidité Maternelle Sévère) study group.
For the current analysis – a population-based, cohort-nested, case-control analysis of study data – the investigators compared 2,500 case patients (8% had twin pregnancies) and 3,650 controls (2% had twin pregnancies) who did not experience severe acute maternal morbidity during that time period (odds ratio, 4.7). After accounting for confounding factors, the increased risk among women with twin versus singleton pregnancies persisted (OR, 4.2) during both the antepartum (OR, 4.1) and intrapartum/postpartum (OR, 4.2) periods.
The majority of events (77%) occurred during the latter periods, and the two most common underlying causal conditions were severe obstetric hemorrhage (66%) and severe hypertensive complications (20%); however, the increased risk in twin pregnancies was apparent, regardless of the underlying cause.
The cesarean delivery rates for twin versus singleton pregnancies were 72% and 34%, respectively, in the case group, and 58% and 18%, respectively, in the control group. A path analysis taking potential indication bias into account showed that 21% of the total risk of intrapartum or postpartum severe acute maternal morbidity risk associated with twin pregnancy was mediated by cesarean delivery, Dr. Madar and associates noted, explaining that, “in other words, if twin pregnancies had the same probability of cesarean delivery as singleton pregnancies, the association found between twin pregnancy and intrapartum or postpartum severe acute maternal morbidity would be reduced by one-fifth.”
This provides further support for limiting the use of cesarean for twin deliveries to cases with clear medical indications, as increasing the rate of vaginal deliveries may decrease the rate of severe acute maternal morbidity, they concluded.
EPIMOMS was supported by the National Research Agency and the Ile de France Regional Health Agency. Dr. Madar received a training grant from the Aquitaine Regional Health Agency. The authors reported having no other relevant financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Madar H et al. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;133:1141-50.
Twin pregnancies are known to be associated with increased risk of maternal morbidity, so the findings of this “very well-designed” study by Madar et al. are “not strikingly different than what we know,” according to Ozhan M. Turan, MD, PhD.
These data alone will do little to change practice, but paired with an increased focus on training with respect to vaginal twin delivery – including in cases of breech presentation of the second baby – they could lead to improved maternal outcomes, he explained, adding that “breech extraction can be very fast and safe in skilled hands.”
Except for the lack of information in the study about whether the twins were monozygotic or dizygotic, the study is sound, and the data may prove useful for counseling patients about the risks and benefits of vaginal versus cesarean delivery and for promoting improved training of residents, maternal-fetal medicine fellows, and junior obstetricians in vaginal twin delivery techniques, he said.
Dr. Turan is director of the division of maternal and fetal medicine and of fetal therapy & complex obstetric surgery at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. He reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
Twin pregnancies are known to be associated with increased risk of maternal morbidity, so the findings of this “very well-designed” study by Madar et al. are “not strikingly different than what we know,” according to Ozhan M. Turan, MD, PhD.
These data alone will do little to change practice, but paired with an increased focus on training with respect to vaginal twin delivery – including in cases of breech presentation of the second baby – they could lead to improved maternal outcomes, he explained, adding that “breech extraction can be very fast and safe in skilled hands.”
Except for the lack of information in the study about whether the twins were monozygotic or dizygotic, the study is sound, and the data may prove useful for counseling patients about the risks and benefits of vaginal versus cesarean delivery and for promoting improved training of residents, maternal-fetal medicine fellows, and junior obstetricians in vaginal twin delivery techniques, he said.
Dr. Turan is director of the division of maternal and fetal medicine and of fetal therapy & complex obstetric surgery at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. He reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
Twin pregnancies are known to be associated with increased risk of maternal morbidity, so the findings of this “very well-designed” study by Madar et al. are “not strikingly different than what we know,” according to Ozhan M. Turan, MD, PhD.
These data alone will do little to change practice, but paired with an increased focus on training with respect to vaginal twin delivery – including in cases of breech presentation of the second baby – they could lead to improved maternal outcomes, he explained, adding that “breech extraction can be very fast and safe in skilled hands.”
Except for the lack of information in the study about whether the twins were monozygotic or dizygotic, the study is sound, and the data may prove useful for counseling patients about the risks and benefits of vaginal versus cesarean delivery and for promoting improved training of residents, maternal-fetal medicine fellows, and junior obstetricians in vaginal twin delivery techniques, he said.
Dr. Turan is director of the division of maternal and fetal medicine and of fetal therapy & complex obstetric surgery at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. He reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
according to findings from the prospective EPIMOMS study.
The population-based incidence of severe acute maternal morbidity occurring between 22 weeks’ of gestation and 42 days post partum in the 2012-2013 French multicenter study was 6.2% among 3,202 twin pregnancies and 1.3% among 179,107 singleton pregnancies, Hugo Madar, MD, MPH, of Bordeaux University Hospital, France, and colleagues reported on behalf of the EPIMOMS (Epidémiologie de la Morbidité Maternelle Sévère) study group.
For the current analysis – a population-based, cohort-nested, case-control analysis of study data – the investigators compared 2,500 case patients (8% had twin pregnancies) and 3,650 controls (2% had twin pregnancies) who did not experience severe acute maternal morbidity during that time period (odds ratio, 4.7). After accounting for confounding factors, the increased risk among women with twin versus singleton pregnancies persisted (OR, 4.2) during both the antepartum (OR, 4.1) and intrapartum/postpartum (OR, 4.2) periods.
The majority of events (77%) occurred during the latter periods, and the two most common underlying causal conditions were severe obstetric hemorrhage (66%) and severe hypertensive complications (20%); however, the increased risk in twin pregnancies was apparent, regardless of the underlying cause.
The cesarean delivery rates for twin versus singleton pregnancies were 72% and 34%, respectively, in the case group, and 58% and 18%, respectively, in the control group. A path analysis taking potential indication bias into account showed that 21% of the total risk of intrapartum or postpartum severe acute maternal morbidity risk associated with twin pregnancy was mediated by cesarean delivery, Dr. Madar and associates noted, explaining that, “in other words, if twin pregnancies had the same probability of cesarean delivery as singleton pregnancies, the association found between twin pregnancy and intrapartum or postpartum severe acute maternal morbidity would be reduced by one-fifth.”
This provides further support for limiting the use of cesarean for twin deliveries to cases with clear medical indications, as increasing the rate of vaginal deliveries may decrease the rate of severe acute maternal morbidity, they concluded.
EPIMOMS was supported by the National Research Agency and the Ile de France Regional Health Agency. Dr. Madar received a training grant from the Aquitaine Regional Health Agency. The authors reported having no other relevant financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Madar H et al. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;133:1141-50.
according to findings from the prospective EPIMOMS study.
The population-based incidence of severe acute maternal morbidity occurring between 22 weeks’ of gestation and 42 days post partum in the 2012-2013 French multicenter study was 6.2% among 3,202 twin pregnancies and 1.3% among 179,107 singleton pregnancies, Hugo Madar, MD, MPH, of Bordeaux University Hospital, France, and colleagues reported on behalf of the EPIMOMS (Epidémiologie de la Morbidité Maternelle Sévère) study group.
For the current analysis – a population-based, cohort-nested, case-control analysis of study data – the investigators compared 2,500 case patients (8% had twin pregnancies) and 3,650 controls (2% had twin pregnancies) who did not experience severe acute maternal morbidity during that time period (odds ratio, 4.7). After accounting for confounding factors, the increased risk among women with twin versus singleton pregnancies persisted (OR, 4.2) during both the antepartum (OR, 4.1) and intrapartum/postpartum (OR, 4.2) periods.
The majority of events (77%) occurred during the latter periods, and the two most common underlying causal conditions were severe obstetric hemorrhage (66%) and severe hypertensive complications (20%); however, the increased risk in twin pregnancies was apparent, regardless of the underlying cause.
The cesarean delivery rates for twin versus singleton pregnancies were 72% and 34%, respectively, in the case group, and 58% and 18%, respectively, in the control group. A path analysis taking potential indication bias into account showed that 21% of the total risk of intrapartum or postpartum severe acute maternal morbidity risk associated with twin pregnancy was mediated by cesarean delivery, Dr. Madar and associates noted, explaining that, “in other words, if twin pregnancies had the same probability of cesarean delivery as singleton pregnancies, the association found between twin pregnancy and intrapartum or postpartum severe acute maternal morbidity would be reduced by one-fifth.”
This provides further support for limiting the use of cesarean for twin deliveries to cases with clear medical indications, as increasing the rate of vaginal deliveries may decrease the rate of severe acute maternal morbidity, they concluded.
EPIMOMS was supported by the National Research Agency and the Ile de France Regional Health Agency. Dr. Madar received a training grant from the Aquitaine Regional Health Agency. The authors reported having no other relevant financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Madar H et al. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;133:1141-50.
FROM OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
A breath of objectivity
How many minutes do you spend each day trying to coax new parents off the guilt train? They have delayed their childbearing until they felt comfortable economically and emotionally ready to raise a child. Convinced that up to this point they have done enough correctly to be considered successful, they see no reason that they won’t be able to tackle parenthood just as easily. Their black lab is a model of obedience. Housebreaking him was a breeze. They are skilled at using the Internet and social media to gather the information they will need for raising a child.
However, at some point in the first 72 hours after the birth of their child, most parents are going to hit the wall of reality. It may be that breastfeeding doesn’t work as well their cousin told them it would or simply that babies cry, often for no discernible reason. Desperately wanting to do what’s right for their child, guilt creeps in as the little failures and fatigue begin to accumulate.
In their search for answers, new parents naturally come to us as pediatricians and family practitioners for the facts, but they also will search the Internet, talk to lactation consultants, and be bombarded by unsolicited advice from family members and neighbors. Every source they turn to, including physicians, will be filtered through its own bias.
I recently came across the most sensible advice for new parents I have read in a long time, and it came not from a pediatrician but from an economics professor at Brown University. Emily Oster, PhD, writing in the New York Times, examines the available data on the topics of breastfeeding, sleep training, and parents working out of the home with the objectivity of an economist and the sensitivity of a mother who has been there and done that (“The Data All Guilt-Ridden Parents Need,” New York Times, April 19, 2019).
For example, she observes that many of the benefits of breastfeeding are supported by some evidence, “just not always especially good evidence. And even when the evidence is good, the benefits are smaller than many people realize.” She points out that “most studies of breastfeeding are biased by the fact that women who breastfeed are typically different from those who do not.” I will leave it to you to read her full discussion that includes a comparison of random trials versus observational studies. But she concludes that, if one relies on only good evidence, the only demonstrable benefit of breastfeeding is for mothers who nurse longer than 12 months who may have a 20%-30% decrease in breast cancer risk.
Using the same kind of careful analysis, Dr. Oster finds that sleep training may have a short-term benefit for parents who will have improved sleep and less maternal depression, but in the long run children who were sleep trained were no different than those that weren’t.
She also finds that, when it comes to the “optimal configuration of adult work hours” for a household, there is “no compelling evidence that proves that having a stay-at-home parent affects child outcomes, positively or negatively.” It is up to each household what works best for all it members, not just the child.
I found it particularly helpful as a practitioner who has often felt shackled, or at least disadvantaged, by the American Academy of Pediatrics’ overly simplistic and sometimes biased recommendations on issues that send my patients’ parents on unfortunate and avoidable guilt trips.
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at [email protected].
How many minutes do you spend each day trying to coax new parents off the guilt train? They have delayed their childbearing until they felt comfortable economically and emotionally ready to raise a child. Convinced that up to this point they have done enough correctly to be considered successful, they see no reason that they won’t be able to tackle parenthood just as easily. Their black lab is a model of obedience. Housebreaking him was a breeze. They are skilled at using the Internet and social media to gather the information they will need for raising a child.
However, at some point in the first 72 hours after the birth of their child, most parents are going to hit the wall of reality. It may be that breastfeeding doesn’t work as well their cousin told them it would or simply that babies cry, often for no discernible reason. Desperately wanting to do what’s right for their child, guilt creeps in as the little failures and fatigue begin to accumulate.
In their search for answers, new parents naturally come to us as pediatricians and family practitioners for the facts, but they also will search the Internet, talk to lactation consultants, and be bombarded by unsolicited advice from family members and neighbors. Every source they turn to, including physicians, will be filtered through its own bias.
I recently came across the most sensible advice for new parents I have read in a long time, and it came not from a pediatrician but from an economics professor at Brown University. Emily Oster, PhD, writing in the New York Times, examines the available data on the topics of breastfeeding, sleep training, and parents working out of the home with the objectivity of an economist and the sensitivity of a mother who has been there and done that (“The Data All Guilt-Ridden Parents Need,” New York Times, April 19, 2019).
For example, she observes that many of the benefits of breastfeeding are supported by some evidence, “just not always especially good evidence. And even when the evidence is good, the benefits are smaller than many people realize.” She points out that “most studies of breastfeeding are biased by the fact that women who breastfeed are typically different from those who do not.” I will leave it to you to read her full discussion that includes a comparison of random trials versus observational studies. But she concludes that, if one relies on only good evidence, the only demonstrable benefit of breastfeeding is for mothers who nurse longer than 12 months who may have a 20%-30% decrease in breast cancer risk.
Using the same kind of careful analysis, Dr. Oster finds that sleep training may have a short-term benefit for parents who will have improved sleep and less maternal depression, but in the long run children who were sleep trained were no different than those that weren’t.
She also finds that, when it comes to the “optimal configuration of adult work hours” for a household, there is “no compelling evidence that proves that having a stay-at-home parent affects child outcomes, positively or negatively.” It is up to each household what works best for all it members, not just the child.
I found it particularly helpful as a practitioner who has often felt shackled, or at least disadvantaged, by the American Academy of Pediatrics’ overly simplistic and sometimes biased recommendations on issues that send my patients’ parents on unfortunate and avoidable guilt trips.
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at [email protected].
How many minutes do you spend each day trying to coax new parents off the guilt train? They have delayed their childbearing until they felt comfortable economically and emotionally ready to raise a child. Convinced that up to this point they have done enough correctly to be considered successful, they see no reason that they won’t be able to tackle parenthood just as easily. Their black lab is a model of obedience. Housebreaking him was a breeze. They are skilled at using the Internet and social media to gather the information they will need for raising a child.
However, at some point in the first 72 hours after the birth of their child, most parents are going to hit the wall of reality. It may be that breastfeeding doesn’t work as well their cousin told them it would or simply that babies cry, often for no discernible reason. Desperately wanting to do what’s right for their child, guilt creeps in as the little failures and fatigue begin to accumulate.
In their search for answers, new parents naturally come to us as pediatricians and family practitioners for the facts, but they also will search the Internet, talk to lactation consultants, and be bombarded by unsolicited advice from family members and neighbors. Every source they turn to, including physicians, will be filtered through its own bias.
I recently came across the most sensible advice for new parents I have read in a long time, and it came not from a pediatrician but from an economics professor at Brown University. Emily Oster, PhD, writing in the New York Times, examines the available data on the topics of breastfeeding, sleep training, and parents working out of the home with the objectivity of an economist and the sensitivity of a mother who has been there and done that (“The Data All Guilt-Ridden Parents Need,” New York Times, April 19, 2019).
For example, she observes that many of the benefits of breastfeeding are supported by some evidence, “just not always especially good evidence. And even when the evidence is good, the benefits are smaller than many people realize.” She points out that “most studies of breastfeeding are biased by the fact that women who breastfeed are typically different from those who do not.” I will leave it to you to read her full discussion that includes a comparison of random trials versus observational studies. But she concludes that, if one relies on only good evidence, the only demonstrable benefit of breastfeeding is for mothers who nurse longer than 12 months who may have a 20%-30% decrease in breast cancer risk.
Using the same kind of careful analysis, Dr. Oster finds that sleep training may have a short-term benefit for parents who will have improved sleep and less maternal depression, but in the long run children who were sleep trained were no different than those that weren’t.
She also finds that, when it comes to the “optimal configuration of adult work hours” for a household, there is “no compelling evidence that proves that having a stay-at-home parent affects child outcomes, positively or negatively.” It is up to each household what works best for all it members, not just the child.
I found it particularly helpful as a practitioner who has often felt shackled, or at least disadvantaged, by the American Academy of Pediatrics’ overly simplistic and sometimes biased recommendations on issues that send my patients’ parents on unfortunate and avoidable guilt trips.
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at [email protected].
Pediatrician knowledge of tampon safety is low
BALTIMORE – and a remarkably high proportion of them lack adequate knowledge themselves about the topic, a new survey-based study found.
“Significant knowledge gaps [were] noted, for instance, [such as] the maximum time a tampon can safely remain in the body,” Miriam Singer of Cohen Children’s Medical Center of New York told attendees of the Pediatric Academic Societies annual meeting.
More than 80% of females aged 17-21 years have used tampons by themselves or with pads, Ms. Singer noted in her background information, yet many teens have low knowledge about their use and safety.
Past research has found that only 35% of high school junior and senior girls heard about tampon use from their mothers, yet many of these mothers showed low knowledge about proper tampon use as well. That same research found that less than 15% of girls aged 10-19 years reported getting information from a health professional about products for menstruation despite recommendations from the American Academy of Pediatrics to instruct girls on feminine hygiene product usage.
Other research has found minimal to no education about menstruation in schools “due to time constraints and stigma associated with menstruation,” Ms. Singer said.
She and her colleagues emailed 2,500 AAP members in November-December 2018 a 53-question online questionnaire about their self-rated and measured knowledge of proper tampon usage and safety and how frequently they discussed tampons with their female adolescent patients. The survey included questions asking pediatricians to self-rate their knowledge about tampon use and safety on a Likert scale of 1 (not at all knowledgeable) to 5 (extremely knowledgeable).
Two incentives provided for completing the survey were a Feminine Hygiene Fact Sheet offered in the first email and an ADHD Medication Guide offered in the third and final email.
Among the 518 pediatricians who responded (21% response rate), 462 met the inclusion criteria of being a primary care pediatrician currently practicing in the United States. Most were women (79%) and white (79%). Just over half of the pediatricians worked only in private practice (54%) and in a suburban area (52%). About a quarter (26%) were in an urban area and 20% in a rural area. Distribution of years in practice (from 1-5 years to over 25 years in 5-year increments) was fairly even across respondents.
Only 9% of respondents reported they very often or almost always talk to their female adolescent patients about how to insert a tampon. The most common tampon-related conversation pediatricians reported was how often to change tampons, which only 35% of respondents said they very often or almost always do.
Yet a similar proportion, 36%, rarely or almost never discuss how often to change tampons, and 62% said they rarely or almost never discuss how to insert a tampon or talk about using tampons while sleeping. Half of respondents (51%) almost never discuss using tampons while swimming (only 21% very often or almost always do), and 77% have not discussed how tampons might affect the hymen with their patients.
More pediatricians (36%) reported almost never discussing the risks of tampon use with female teens than those who sometimes (32%) or very often/almost always (31%) discussed risks.
Respondents also were generally much more willing to discuss tampons with older adolescents than younger ones. Only 18% of respondents said they were highly likely to discuss them with 12- and 13-year-olds, compared with almost twice as many (33%) who would discuss tampons with 16- and 17-year-olds (P less than .001).
Male pediatricians were significantly less likely to discuss any of these topics with their female adolescent patients than female pediatricians (P less than .001 for all questions except risks [P = .01] and hymen [P = .04]). They also rated their knowledge about tampons as significantly lower than self ratings by female pediatricians (P less than .001). Less than half of pediatricians (43%) rated their knowledge about tampons as high or very high, and one in five (20%) rated it as low.
Actual measured knowledge reflected the self-ratings, but still revealed substantial gaps in knowledge among male and female providers. Just over half of male pediatricians (52%) answered all questions about tampon use and safety correctly; however, female pediatricians were only slightly better, with 71% answering all questions correctly (P less than .001). Less than half of male and female pediatricians knew the maximum time a tampon could stay in before it should be removed to reduce risk of toxic shock syndrome (8 hours).
The only two questions that more than half of male pediatricians answered correctly were that girls can swim in the ocean while wearing a tampon and that it can, rarely but not typically, tear the hymen. Less than half knew girls could sleep while wearing a tampon and that a girl could start using a tampon with her first menstruation.
More than half of female pediatricians answered all these questions correctly, although only about two-thirds gave correct answers on how tampons can affect the hymen (the only question that more male pediatricians than female answered correctly), whether a girl can sleep in a tampon, and that patients should use the lowest effective absorbency tampon to minimize toxic shock syndrome risk.
Although the study is limited by a nonvalidated knowledge assessment instrument, self-reporting and potential selection bias means the study may not accurately represent U.S. primary care pediatricians nationwide; however, the findings still demonstrate notably low self-rated and measured knowledge about tampons.
“Given the AAP’s recommendation that pediatricians instruct girls on the use of feminine products, pediatricians must take steps to ensure they are educating patients about tampons,” Ms. Singer said. She also recommended the development of web-based resources targeting the improvement of pediatrician knowledge about tampon use and safety, and the need for the AAP to raise awareness about the importance of discussing tampons with female adolescent patients.
The study did not use external funding, and the authors reported no relevant financial disclosures.
BALTIMORE – and a remarkably high proportion of them lack adequate knowledge themselves about the topic, a new survey-based study found.
“Significant knowledge gaps [were] noted, for instance, [such as] the maximum time a tampon can safely remain in the body,” Miriam Singer of Cohen Children’s Medical Center of New York told attendees of the Pediatric Academic Societies annual meeting.
More than 80% of females aged 17-21 years have used tampons by themselves or with pads, Ms. Singer noted in her background information, yet many teens have low knowledge about their use and safety.
Past research has found that only 35% of high school junior and senior girls heard about tampon use from their mothers, yet many of these mothers showed low knowledge about proper tampon use as well. That same research found that less than 15% of girls aged 10-19 years reported getting information from a health professional about products for menstruation despite recommendations from the American Academy of Pediatrics to instruct girls on feminine hygiene product usage.
Other research has found minimal to no education about menstruation in schools “due to time constraints and stigma associated with menstruation,” Ms. Singer said.
She and her colleagues emailed 2,500 AAP members in November-December 2018 a 53-question online questionnaire about their self-rated and measured knowledge of proper tampon usage and safety and how frequently they discussed tampons with their female adolescent patients. The survey included questions asking pediatricians to self-rate their knowledge about tampon use and safety on a Likert scale of 1 (not at all knowledgeable) to 5 (extremely knowledgeable).
Two incentives provided for completing the survey were a Feminine Hygiene Fact Sheet offered in the first email and an ADHD Medication Guide offered in the third and final email.
Among the 518 pediatricians who responded (21% response rate), 462 met the inclusion criteria of being a primary care pediatrician currently practicing in the United States. Most were women (79%) and white (79%). Just over half of the pediatricians worked only in private practice (54%) and in a suburban area (52%). About a quarter (26%) were in an urban area and 20% in a rural area. Distribution of years in practice (from 1-5 years to over 25 years in 5-year increments) was fairly even across respondents.
Only 9% of respondents reported they very often or almost always talk to their female adolescent patients about how to insert a tampon. The most common tampon-related conversation pediatricians reported was how often to change tampons, which only 35% of respondents said they very often or almost always do.
Yet a similar proportion, 36%, rarely or almost never discuss how often to change tampons, and 62% said they rarely or almost never discuss how to insert a tampon or talk about using tampons while sleeping. Half of respondents (51%) almost never discuss using tampons while swimming (only 21% very often or almost always do), and 77% have not discussed how tampons might affect the hymen with their patients.
More pediatricians (36%) reported almost never discussing the risks of tampon use with female teens than those who sometimes (32%) or very often/almost always (31%) discussed risks.
Respondents also were generally much more willing to discuss tampons with older adolescents than younger ones. Only 18% of respondents said they were highly likely to discuss them with 12- and 13-year-olds, compared with almost twice as many (33%) who would discuss tampons with 16- and 17-year-olds (P less than .001).
Male pediatricians were significantly less likely to discuss any of these topics with their female adolescent patients than female pediatricians (P less than .001 for all questions except risks [P = .01] and hymen [P = .04]). They also rated their knowledge about tampons as significantly lower than self ratings by female pediatricians (P less than .001). Less than half of pediatricians (43%) rated their knowledge about tampons as high or very high, and one in five (20%) rated it as low.
Actual measured knowledge reflected the self-ratings, but still revealed substantial gaps in knowledge among male and female providers. Just over half of male pediatricians (52%) answered all questions about tampon use and safety correctly; however, female pediatricians were only slightly better, with 71% answering all questions correctly (P less than .001). Less than half of male and female pediatricians knew the maximum time a tampon could stay in before it should be removed to reduce risk of toxic shock syndrome (8 hours).
The only two questions that more than half of male pediatricians answered correctly were that girls can swim in the ocean while wearing a tampon and that it can, rarely but not typically, tear the hymen. Less than half knew girls could sleep while wearing a tampon and that a girl could start using a tampon with her first menstruation.
More than half of female pediatricians answered all these questions correctly, although only about two-thirds gave correct answers on how tampons can affect the hymen (the only question that more male pediatricians than female answered correctly), whether a girl can sleep in a tampon, and that patients should use the lowest effective absorbency tampon to minimize toxic shock syndrome risk.
Although the study is limited by a nonvalidated knowledge assessment instrument, self-reporting and potential selection bias means the study may not accurately represent U.S. primary care pediatricians nationwide; however, the findings still demonstrate notably low self-rated and measured knowledge about tampons.
“Given the AAP’s recommendation that pediatricians instruct girls on the use of feminine products, pediatricians must take steps to ensure they are educating patients about tampons,” Ms. Singer said. She also recommended the development of web-based resources targeting the improvement of pediatrician knowledge about tampon use and safety, and the need for the AAP to raise awareness about the importance of discussing tampons with female adolescent patients.
The study did not use external funding, and the authors reported no relevant financial disclosures.
BALTIMORE – and a remarkably high proportion of them lack adequate knowledge themselves about the topic, a new survey-based study found.
“Significant knowledge gaps [were] noted, for instance, [such as] the maximum time a tampon can safely remain in the body,” Miriam Singer of Cohen Children’s Medical Center of New York told attendees of the Pediatric Academic Societies annual meeting.
More than 80% of females aged 17-21 years have used tampons by themselves or with pads, Ms. Singer noted in her background information, yet many teens have low knowledge about their use and safety.
Past research has found that only 35% of high school junior and senior girls heard about tampon use from their mothers, yet many of these mothers showed low knowledge about proper tampon use as well. That same research found that less than 15% of girls aged 10-19 years reported getting information from a health professional about products for menstruation despite recommendations from the American Academy of Pediatrics to instruct girls on feminine hygiene product usage.
Other research has found minimal to no education about menstruation in schools “due to time constraints and stigma associated with menstruation,” Ms. Singer said.
She and her colleagues emailed 2,500 AAP members in November-December 2018 a 53-question online questionnaire about their self-rated and measured knowledge of proper tampon usage and safety and how frequently they discussed tampons with their female adolescent patients. The survey included questions asking pediatricians to self-rate their knowledge about tampon use and safety on a Likert scale of 1 (not at all knowledgeable) to 5 (extremely knowledgeable).
Two incentives provided for completing the survey were a Feminine Hygiene Fact Sheet offered in the first email and an ADHD Medication Guide offered in the third and final email.
Among the 518 pediatricians who responded (21% response rate), 462 met the inclusion criteria of being a primary care pediatrician currently practicing in the United States. Most were women (79%) and white (79%). Just over half of the pediatricians worked only in private practice (54%) and in a suburban area (52%). About a quarter (26%) were in an urban area and 20% in a rural area. Distribution of years in practice (from 1-5 years to over 25 years in 5-year increments) was fairly even across respondents.
Only 9% of respondents reported they very often or almost always talk to their female adolescent patients about how to insert a tampon. The most common tampon-related conversation pediatricians reported was how often to change tampons, which only 35% of respondents said they very often or almost always do.
Yet a similar proportion, 36%, rarely or almost never discuss how often to change tampons, and 62% said they rarely or almost never discuss how to insert a tampon or talk about using tampons while sleeping. Half of respondents (51%) almost never discuss using tampons while swimming (only 21% very often or almost always do), and 77% have not discussed how tampons might affect the hymen with their patients.
More pediatricians (36%) reported almost never discussing the risks of tampon use with female teens than those who sometimes (32%) or very often/almost always (31%) discussed risks.
Respondents also were generally much more willing to discuss tampons with older adolescents than younger ones. Only 18% of respondents said they were highly likely to discuss them with 12- and 13-year-olds, compared with almost twice as many (33%) who would discuss tampons with 16- and 17-year-olds (P less than .001).
Male pediatricians were significantly less likely to discuss any of these topics with their female adolescent patients than female pediatricians (P less than .001 for all questions except risks [P = .01] and hymen [P = .04]). They also rated their knowledge about tampons as significantly lower than self ratings by female pediatricians (P less than .001). Less than half of pediatricians (43%) rated their knowledge about tampons as high or very high, and one in five (20%) rated it as low.
Actual measured knowledge reflected the self-ratings, but still revealed substantial gaps in knowledge among male and female providers. Just over half of male pediatricians (52%) answered all questions about tampon use and safety correctly; however, female pediatricians were only slightly better, with 71% answering all questions correctly (P less than .001). Less than half of male and female pediatricians knew the maximum time a tampon could stay in before it should be removed to reduce risk of toxic shock syndrome (8 hours).
The only two questions that more than half of male pediatricians answered correctly were that girls can swim in the ocean while wearing a tampon and that it can, rarely but not typically, tear the hymen. Less than half knew girls could sleep while wearing a tampon and that a girl could start using a tampon with her first menstruation.
More than half of female pediatricians answered all these questions correctly, although only about two-thirds gave correct answers on how tampons can affect the hymen (the only question that more male pediatricians than female answered correctly), whether a girl can sleep in a tampon, and that patients should use the lowest effective absorbency tampon to minimize toxic shock syndrome risk.
Although the study is limited by a nonvalidated knowledge assessment instrument, self-reporting and potential selection bias means the study may not accurately represent U.S. primary care pediatricians nationwide; however, the findings still demonstrate notably low self-rated and measured knowledge about tampons.
“Given the AAP’s recommendation that pediatricians instruct girls on the use of feminine products, pediatricians must take steps to ensure they are educating patients about tampons,” Ms. Singer said. She also recommended the development of web-based resources targeting the improvement of pediatrician knowledge about tampon use and safety, and the need for the AAP to raise awareness about the importance of discussing tampons with female adolescent patients.
The study did not use external funding, and the authors reported no relevant financial disclosures.
REPORTING FROM PAS 2019
Key clinical point: U.S. pediatricians have low knowledge of and willingness to discuss proper tampon use and safety with adolescent patients.
Major finding: 35% of U.S. pediatricians reported they very often/almost always discuss how long to wear a tampon before removing it.
Study details: The findings are based on a survey of 462 U.S. pediatricians who responded to a 53-question online survey.
Disclosures: The study did not use external funding, and the authors reported no relevant financial disclosures.
Magnetic beads functionalized with VEGF could treat preeclampsia
A method of apheresis using vascular endothelial growth factor functionalized magnetic beads reduced levels of the soluble form of the vascular endothelial growth factor 1 in blood from women with preeclampsia, according to recent research published in the journal Hypertension.
The approach both reduces levels of the soluble form of the vascular endothelial growth factor 1 (sFlt-1) and releases placental growth factor (PlGF), which could help restore endothelial function in women with preeclampsia. The researchers said they chose sFlt-1 as a target because of “mounting evidence of its involvement in the pathogenesis of preeclampsia.” sFlt-1 has been suspected of inhibiting angiogenic signaling through “direct sequestration of angiogenic ligands” vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and PlGF as well as “dominant-negative heterodimerization with surface VEGFRs.”
“During normal pregnancy, massive amounts of PlGF are produced by the placenta, reaching concentrations of free PlGF around 400 pg/mL, whereas during preeclampsia, free PlGF is extremely low due to the release of sFlt-1 into the maternal circulation,” the researchers said.
Using VEGF-functionalized magnetic beads, the researchers performed static and dynamic experiments using phosphate buffered saline (PBS), conditioned media, and plasma from women with preeclampsia. Under static conditions, there was a decrease of 33% for sFlt-1 and an increase of 27% for PlGF, while in dynamic conditions, there was a 40% decrease in sFlt-1 and a twofold increase in freed PlGF. When tested with plasma from women with preeclampsia, the ratio of sFlt-1/PlGF decreased by 63%, and VEGF release was associated with apheresis.
“This was a proof of concept study and our approach aims to restore physiologic levels of angiogenic factors,” Vassilis Tsatsaris, MD, PhD, of Cochin Hospital, Paris, said in a press release. “The reduction of sFlt-1 and the release of angiogenic factors is very significant and promising.”
Dr. Tsatsaris and his colleagues noted their next steps are to optimize the process of reducing sFlt-1 and examining how the approach works in an animal model.
“During normal pregnancy, circulating free VEGF levels are very low, almost undetectable with noncompetitive [enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay] ELISA. Whether these extremely low levels of VEGF have a physiological role during pregnancy is not known,” they wrote.
This study was funded by Agence Nationale pour la recherche, Institut Pierre Gilles de Gennes and the PremUP Foundation. One author reported receiving a grant from the Ecole Normale Supérieure and a second author reported receiving a grant from the Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale. The other authors report no relevant conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Trapiella-Alfonso L et al. Hypertension. 2019. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.118.12380.
A method of apheresis using vascular endothelial growth factor functionalized magnetic beads reduced levels of the soluble form of the vascular endothelial growth factor 1 in blood from women with preeclampsia, according to recent research published in the journal Hypertension.
The approach both reduces levels of the soluble form of the vascular endothelial growth factor 1 (sFlt-1) and releases placental growth factor (PlGF), which could help restore endothelial function in women with preeclampsia. The researchers said they chose sFlt-1 as a target because of “mounting evidence of its involvement in the pathogenesis of preeclampsia.” sFlt-1 has been suspected of inhibiting angiogenic signaling through “direct sequestration of angiogenic ligands” vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and PlGF as well as “dominant-negative heterodimerization with surface VEGFRs.”
“During normal pregnancy, massive amounts of PlGF are produced by the placenta, reaching concentrations of free PlGF around 400 pg/mL, whereas during preeclampsia, free PlGF is extremely low due to the release of sFlt-1 into the maternal circulation,” the researchers said.
Using VEGF-functionalized magnetic beads, the researchers performed static and dynamic experiments using phosphate buffered saline (PBS), conditioned media, and plasma from women with preeclampsia. Under static conditions, there was a decrease of 33% for sFlt-1 and an increase of 27% for PlGF, while in dynamic conditions, there was a 40% decrease in sFlt-1 and a twofold increase in freed PlGF. When tested with plasma from women with preeclampsia, the ratio of sFlt-1/PlGF decreased by 63%, and VEGF release was associated with apheresis.
“This was a proof of concept study and our approach aims to restore physiologic levels of angiogenic factors,” Vassilis Tsatsaris, MD, PhD, of Cochin Hospital, Paris, said in a press release. “The reduction of sFlt-1 and the release of angiogenic factors is very significant and promising.”
Dr. Tsatsaris and his colleagues noted their next steps are to optimize the process of reducing sFlt-1 and examining how the approach works in an animal model.
“During normal pregnancy, circulating free VEGF levels are very low, almost undetectable with noncompetitive [enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay] ELISA. Whether these extremely low levels of VEGF have a physiological role during pregnancy is not known,” they wrote.
This study was funded by Agence Nationale pour la recherche, Institut Pierre Gilles de Gennes and the PremUP Foundation. One author reported receiving a grant from the Ecole Normale Supérieure and a second author reported receiving a grant from the Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale. The other authors report no relevant conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Trapiella-Alfonso L et al. Hypertension. 2019. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.118.12380.
A method of apheresis using vascular endothelial growth factor functionalized magnetic beads reduced levels of the soluble form of the vascular endothelial growth factor 1 in blood from women with preeclampsia, according to recent research published in the journal Hypertension.
The approach both reduces levels of the soluble form of the vascular endothelial growth factor 1 (sFlt-1) and releases placental growth factor (PlGF), which could help restore endothelial function in women with preeclampsia. The researchers said they chose sFlt-1 as a target because of “mounting evidence of its involvement in the pathogenesis of preeclampsia.” sFlt-1 has been suspected of inhibiting angiogenic signaling through “direct sequestration of angiogenic ligands” vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and PlGF as well as “dominant-negative heterodimerization with surface VEGFRs.”
“During normal pregnancy, massive amounts of PlGF are produced by the placenta, reaching concentrations of free PlGF around 400 pg/mL, whereas during preeclampsia, free PlGF is extremely low due to the release of sFlt-1 into the maternal circulation,” the researchers said.
Using VEGF-functionalized magnetic beads, the researchers performed static and dynamic experiments using phosphate buffered saline (PBS), conditioned media, and plasma from women with preeclampsia. Under static conditions, there was a decrease of 33% for sFlt-1 and an increase of 27% for PlGF, while in dynamic conditions, there was a 40% decrease in sFlt-1 and a twofold increase in freed PlGF. When tested with plasma from women with preeclampsia, the ratio of sFlt-1/PlGF decreased by 63%, and VEGF release was associated with apheresis.
“This was a proof of concept study and our approach aims to restore physiologic levels of angiogenic factors,” Vassilis Tsatsaris, MD, PhD, of Cochin Hospital, Paris, said in a press release. “The reduction of sFlt-1 and the release of angiogenic factors is very significant and promising.”
Dr. Tsatsaris and his colleagues noted their next steps are to optimize the process of reducing sFlt-1 and examining how the approach works in an animal model.
“During normal pregnancy, circulating free VEGF levels are very low, almost undetectable with noncompetitive [enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay] ELISA. Whether these extremely low levels of VEGF have a physiological role during pregnancy is not known,” they wrote.
This study was funded by Agence Nationale pour la recherche, Institut Pierre Gilles de Gennes and the PremUP Foundation. One author reported receiving a grant from the Ecole Normale Supérieure and a second author reported receiving a grant from the Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale. The other authors report no relevant conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Trapiella-Alfonso L et al. Hypertension. 2019. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.118.12380.
FROM HYPERTENSION
Key clinical point: Use of magnetic beads functionalized with vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) reduced the soluble form of endothelial growth factor 1 (sFlt-1) in the blood of women with preeclampsia.
Major finding: sFlt-1 was reduced by 40% under dynamic conditions, and there was a twofold increase in the amount of freed placental growth factor.
Study details: A proof-of-concept study using VEGF-functionalized magnetic beads and phosphate buffered saline (PBS), conditioned media, and plasma from women with preeclampsia.
Disclosures: This study was funded by Agence Nationale pour la recherche, Institut Pierre Gilles de Gennes, and the PremUP Foundation. One author reported receiving a grant from the Ecole Normale Supérieure and a second author reported receiving a grant from the Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale. The other authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.
Source: Trapiella-Alfonso L et al. Hypertension. 2019. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.118.12380.
2019 Update: Contraceptives and unintended pregnancy rates
NASHVILLE, TENN. – The unintended pregnancy rate is declining after years of hovering at close to 50%.
While the rates among women of color remain high – currently at 58 and 79 per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years for Hispanic and black women, respectively – they have declined from 79 and 92 per 1,000 Hispanic and black women in that age group in 2008, and the overall rate is now at about 45%, Eve Espey, MD, said at the annual clinical and scientific meeting of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
“Considering the scope and number of women affected by unplanned pregnancy, this is actually a huge public health achievement,” said Dr. Espey, professor and chair of the department of obstetrics & gynecology at the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.
she noted, adding that “another enormous determinant of this decrease in unintended pregnancy is the use of long-acting reversible contraception [LARC].” About 2% of women used contraceptives in 2002, and now, based on the latest cycle of data from 2015-2017, 16% of women use contraceptives.
In this video interview, Dr. Espey discusses the main points of her talk entitled “Contraceptives: What you need to know in 2019,” including:
- The importance of “following reproductive justice–based principles and counseling” when it comes to prescribing contraceptives.
- The latest data showing that certain LARC methods remain safe and effective beyond their approved duration of use.
- Trends with respect to tubal ligation and salpingectomy.
- The value of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria (MEC) for evidence-based guidance on selecting contraceptives based on patients’ individual needs.
“[MEC] is something every ob.gyn. should consider using,” she said, noting that access is available through a free app. “As our patients are more complex and have more comorbidities, it’s particularly helpful for matching up patients and their conditions with recommendations for specific contraceptive methods.”
Dr. Espey reported having no financial disclosures.
NASHVILLE, TENN. – The unintended pregnancy rate is declining after years of hovering at close to 50%.
While the rates among women of color remain high – currently at 58 and 79 per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years for Hispanic and black women, respectively – they have declined from 79 and 92 per 1,000 Hispanic and black women in that age group in 2008, and the overall rate is now at about 45%, Eve Espey, MD, said at the annual clinical and scientific meeting of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
“Considering the scope and number of women affected by unplanned pregnancy, this is actually a huge public health achievement,” said Dr. Espey, professor and chair of the department of obstetrics & gynecology at the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.
she noted, adding that “another enormous determinant of this decrease in unintended pregnancy is the use of long-acting reversible contraception [LARC].” About 2% of women used contraceptives in 2002, and now, based on the latest cycle of data from 2015-2017, 16% of women use contraceptives.
In this video interview, Dr. Espey discusses the main points of her talk entitled “Contraceptives: What you need to know in 2019,” including:
- The importance of “following reproductive justice–based principles and counseling” when it comes to prescribing contraceptives.
- The latest data showing that certain LARC methods remain safe and effective beyond their approved duration of use.
- Trends with respect to tubal ligation and salpingectomy.
- The value of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria (MEC) for evidence-based guidance on selecting contraceptives based on patients’ individual needs.
“[MEC] is something every ob.gyn. should consider using,” she said, noting that access is available through a free app. “As our patients are more complex and have more comorbidities, it’s particularly helpful for matching up patients and their conditions with recommendations for specific contraceptive methods.”
Dr. Espey reported having no financial disclosures.
NASHVILLE, TENN. – The unintended pregnancy rate is declining after years of hovering at close to 50%.
While the rates among women of color remain high – currently at 58 and 79 per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years for Hispanic and black women, respectively – they have declined from 79 and 92 per 1,000 Hispanic and black women in that age group in 2008, and the overall rate is now at about 45%, Eve Espey, MD, said at the annual clinical and scientific meeting of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
“Considering the scope and number of women affected by unplanned pregnancy, this is actually a huge public health achievement,” said Dr. Espey, professor and chair of the department of obstetrics & gynecology at the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.
she noted, adding that “another enormous determinant of this decrease in unintended pregnancy is the use of long-acting reversible contraception [LARC].” About 2% of women used contraceptives in 2002, and now, based on the latest cycle of data from 2015-2017, 16% of women use contraceptives.
In this video interview, Dr. Espey discusses the main points of her talk entitled “Contraceptives: What you need to know in 2019,” including:
- The importance of “following reproductive justice–based principles and counseling” when it comes to prescribing contraceptives.
- The latest data showing that certain LARC methods remain safe and effective beyond their approved duration of use.
- Trends with respect to tubal ligation and salpingectomy.
- The value of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria (MEC) for evidence-based guidance on selecting contraceptives based on patients’ individual needs.
“[MEC] is something every ob.gyn. should consider using,” she said, noting that access is available through a free app. “As our patients are more complex and have more comorbidities, it’s particularly helpful for matching up patients and their conditions with recommendations for specific contraceptive methods.”
Dr. Espey reported having no financial disclosures.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM ACOG 2019
Managing 2nd trimester loss: Shared decision making, honor patient preference
NASHVILLE, TENN. – according to Sara W. Prager, MD.
Information transfer between the physician and patient, as opposed to a provider-driven or patient-driven decision-making process, better ensures that “the best possible decision” will be reached, Dr. Prager, director of the family planning division and family planning fellowship at the University of Washington in Seattle, said at the annual clinical and scientific meeting of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
Engaging the patient in the process – actively involving and supporting her in health care and treatment decision-making activities – is critically important, especially when dealing with pregnancy loss, which involves an acute sense of powerlessness, she said. Patient engagement is essential for respecting her autonomy, enhancing her agency, improving health status, reducing decisional conflict, and improving overall satisfaction.
Shared decision making requires a discussion about how the two approaches compare, particularly with respect to specific complications associated with each, Dr. Prager said, noting that discussion of values also should be encouraged.
Although surgical management is used more often, both approaches are safe and effective, and in the absence of clear contraindications in settings where both medication and a practitioner skilled in dilatation and evacuation are available, patient preference should honored, she said.
In this video interview, Dr. Prager further explains her position. “Using evidence-based medicine to have a shared decision-making process ... is extremely helpful for patients to feel like they have some control in this out-of-control situation where they’re experiencing a pregnancy loss.”
She also discussed how the use of mifepristone plus misoprostol for medical management of second-trimester loss has the potential to improve access.
“This is medication that, because of stigma surrounding abortion, is not always available ... so actually using it for non–abortion-related activities can be a way to help reduce that stigma around the medication itself, and get it into clinical sites, because it really does meaningfully improve management in the second trimester, as well as in the first trimester.”
In fact, the combination can cut nearly in half the amount of time it takes from the start of an induction until the end of the induction process, she said.
Dr. Prager also discussed surgical training resources and how to advocate for patient access to family planning experts who have the appropriate training.
Dr. Prager said she had no relevant financial disclosures.
NASHVILLE, TENN. – according to Sara W. Prager, MD.
Information transfer between the physician and patient, as opposed to a provider-driven or patient-driven decision-making process, better ensures that “the best possible decision” will be reached, Dr. Prager, director of the family planning division and family planning fellowship at the University of Washington in Seattle, said at the annual clinical and scientific meeting of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
Engaging the patient in the process – actively involving and supporting her in health care and treatment decision-making activities – is critically important, especially when dealing with pregnancy loss, which involves an acute sense of powerlessness, she said. Patient engagement is essential for respecting her autonomy, enhancing her agency, improving health status, reducing decisional conflict, and improving overall satisfaction.
Shared decision making requires a discussion about how the two approaches compare, particularly with respect to specific complications associated with each, Dr. Prager said, noting that discussion of values also should be encouraged.
Although surgical management is used more often, both approaches are safe and effective, and in the absence of clear contraindications in settings where both medication and a practitioner skilled in dilatation and evacuation are available, patient preference should honored, she said.
In this video interview, Dr. Prager further explains her position. “Using evidence-based medicine to have a shared decision-making process ... is extremely helpful for patients to feel like they have some control in this out-of-control situation where they’re experiencing a pregnancy loss.”
She also discussed how the use of mifepristone plus misoprostol for medical management of second-trimester loss has the potential to improve access.
“This is medication that, because of stigma surrounding abortion, is not always available ... so actually using it for non–abortion-related activities can be a way to help reduce that stigma around the medication itself, and get it into clinical sites, because it really does meaningfully improve management in the second trimester, as well as in the first trimester.”
In fact, the combination can cut nearly in half the amount of time it takes from the start of an induction until the end of the induction process, she said.
Dr. Prager also discussed surgical training resources and how to advocate for patient access to family planning experts who have the appropriate training.
Dr. Prager said she had no relevant financial disclosures.
NASHVILLE, TENN. – according to Sara W. Prager, MD.
Information transfer between the physician and patient, as opposed to a provider-driven or patient-driven decision-making process, better ensures that “the best possible decision” will be reached, Dr. Prager, director of the family planning division and family planning fellowship at the University of Washington in Seattle, said at the annual clinical and scientific meeting of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
Engaging the patient in the process – actively involving and supporting her in health care and treatment decision-making activities – is critically important, especially when dealing with pregnancy loss, which involves an acute sense of powerlessness, she said. Patient engagement is essential for respecting her autonomy, enhancing her agency, improving health status, reducing decisional conflict, and improving overall satisfaction.
Shared decision making requires a discussion about how the two approaches compare, particularly with respect to specific complications associated with each, Dr. Prager said, noting that discussion of values also should be encouraged.
Although surgical management is used more often, both approaches are safe and effective, and in the absence of clear contraindications in settings where both medication and a practitioner skilled in dilatation and evacuation are available, patient preference should honored, she said.
In this video interview, Dr. Prager further explains her position. “Using evidence-based medicine to have a shared decision-making process ... is extremely helpful for patients to feel like they have some control in this out-of-control situation where they’re experiencing a pregnancy loss.”
She also discussed how the use of mifepristone plus misoprostol for medical management of second-trimester loss has the potential to improve access.
“This is medication that, because of stigma surrounding abortion, is not always available ... so actually using it for non–abortion-related activities can be a way to help reduce that stigma around the medication itself, and get it into clinical sites, because it really does meaningfully improve management in the second trimester, as well as in the first trimester.”
In fact, the combination can cut nearly in half the amount of time it takes from the start of an induction until the end of the induction process, she said.
Dr. Prager also discussed surgical training resources and how to advocate for patient access to family planning experts who have the appropriate training.
Dr. Prager said she had no relevant financial disclosures.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM ACOG 2019
Is routine induction of labor in a healthy pregnancy at 39 weeks reasonable?
NASHVILLE, TENN. – Aaron B. Caughey, MD, PhD, discussed this in a video at the annual clinical and scientific meeting of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
In a healthy pregnancy, with no medical indications for induction of labor, 39-40 weeks’ gestation is a time when there is a relatively low risk of stillbirth, although the risk is not zero, Dr. Caughey explained. The same is true for neonatal death. This gestational age is a time when there is a low risk for respiratory complications and a low risk for meconium.
“This might be a nice time to have a baby,” said Dr. Caughey, professor and chair of the department of obstetrics and gynecology at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland. “The trade-off is intervention. Don’t you increase the risk of C-sections?”
Actually, numerous retrospective studies have shown that there is either no difference or a decreased rate of C-sections with induction of labor at 39-40 weeks’ gestation, compared with expectant management.
These findings led to a prospective, randomized study by William A. Grobman, MD, and associates for the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network called the ARRIVE trial (N Engl J Med. 2018;379:513-23). In that trial, the investigators randomized 3,062 women to induction of labor and 3,044 to expectant management. A significantly lower percentage of women in the induction of labor group underwent C-section than did women randomized to expectant management: 19% vs. 22% (relative risk, 0.84; P less than .001) – that is, 16% fewer C-sections. Also, 36% fewer women in the induction of labor group experienced preeclampsia. No significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of neonatal outcomes.
However, this is just one study, Dr. Caughey noted. What does is mean for a local community hospital? What does it mean for a busy private obstetrics practice?
Watch this video for his answer.
NASHVILLE, TENN. – Aaron B. Caughey, MD, PhD, discussed this in a video at the annual clinical and scientific meeting of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
In a healthy pregnancy, with no medical indications for induction of labor, 39-40 weeks’ gestation is a time when there is a relatively low risk of stillbirth, although the risk is not zero, Dr. Caughey explained. The same is true for neonatal death. This gestational age is a time when there is a low risk for respiratory complications and a low risk for meconium.
“This might be a nice time to have a baby,” said Dr. Caughey, professor and chair of the department of obstetrics and gynecology at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland. “The trade-off is intervention. Don’t you increase the risk of C-sections?”
Actually, numerous retrospective studies have shown that there is either no difference or a decreased rate of C-sections with induction of labor at 39-40 weeks’ gestation, compared with expectant management.
These findings led to a prospective, randomized study by William A. Grobman, MD, and associates for the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network called the ARRIVE trial (N Engl J Med. 2018;379:513-23). In that trial, the investigators randomized 3,062 women to induction of labor and 3,044 to expectant management. A significantly lower percentage of women in the induction of labor group underwent C-section than did women randomized to expectant management: 19% vs. 22% (relative risk, 0.84; P less than .001) – that is, 16% fewer C-sections. Also, 36% fewer women in the induction of labor group experienced preeclampsia. No significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of neonatal outcomes.
However, this is just one study, Dr. Caughey noted. What does is mean for a local community hospital? What does it mean for a busy private obstetrics practice?
Watch this video for his answer.
NASHVILLE, TENN. – Aaron B. Caughey, MD, PhD, discussed this in a video at the annual clinical and scientific meeting of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
In a healthy pregnancy, with no medical indications for induction of labor, 39-40 weeks’ gestation is a time when there is a relatively low risk of stillbirth, although the risk is not zero, Dr. Caughey explained. The same is true for neonatal death. This gestational age is a time when there is a low risk for respiratory complications and a low risk for meconium.
“This might be a nice time to have a baby,” said Dr. Caughey, professor and chair of the department of obstetrics and gynecology at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland. “The trade-off is intervention. Don’t you increase the risk of C-sections?”
Actually, numerous retrospective studies have shown that there is either no difference or a decreased rate of C-sections with induction of labor at 39-40 weeks’ gestation, compared with expectant management.
These findings led to a prospective, randomized study by William A. Grobman, MD, and associates for the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network called the ARRIVE trial (N Engl J Med. 2018;379:513-23). In that trial, the investigators randomized 3,062 women to induction of labor and 3,044 to expectant management. A significantly lower percentage of women in the induction of labor group underwent C-section than did women randomized to expectant management: 19% vs. 22% (relative risk, 0.84; P less than .001) – that is, 16% fewer C-sections. Also, 36% fewer women in the induction of labor group experienced preeclampsia. No significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of neonatal outcomes.
However, this is just one study, Dr. Caughey noted. What does is mean for a local community hospital? What does it mean for a busy private obstetrics practice?
Watch this video for his answer.
REPORTING FROM ACOG 2019
