Cargando…

Intrapartum ultrasound and mother acceptance: A study with informed consent and questionnaire

INTRODUCTION: Intrapartum ultrasound (IU) is used in the delivery ward; even if IU monitors the labouring women, it could be perceived as a discomfort and even as an“ obstetric violence”, because it is a young technique, not often well "accepted". A group of clinicians aimed at obtain an i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Malvasi, Antonio, Damiani, Gianluca Raffaello, DI Naro, Edoardo, Vitagliano, Amerigo, Dellino, Miriam, Achiron, Reuven, Ioannis, Kosmas, Vimercati, Antonella, Gaetani, Maria, Cicinelli, Ettore, Vinciguerra, Marina, Ricci, Ilaria, Tinelli, Andrea, Baldini, Giorgio Maria, Silvestris, Erica, Trojano, Giuseppe
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10590726/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37876768
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eurox.2023.100246
_version_ 1785124054132326400
author Malvasi, Antonio
Damiani, Gianluca Raffaello
DI Naro, Edoardo
Vitagliano, Amerigo
Dellino, Miriam
Achiron, Reuven
Ioannis, Kosmas
Vimercati, Antonella
Gaetani, Maria
Cicinelli, Ettore
Vinciguerra, Marina
Ricci, Ilaria
Tinelli, Andrea
Baldini, Giorgio Maria
Silvestris, Erica
Trojano, Giuseppe
author_facet Malvasi, Antonio
Damiani, Gianluca Raffaello
DI Naro, Edoardo
Vitagliano, Amerigo
Dellino, Miriam
Achiron, Reuven
Ioannis, Kosmas
Vimercati, Antonella
Gaetani, Maria
Cicinelli, Ettore
Vinciguerra, Marina
Ricci, Ilaria
Tinelli, Andrea
Baldini, Giorgio Maria
Silvestris, Erica
Trojano, Giuseppe
author_sort Malvasi, Antonio
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Intrapartum ultrasound (IU) is used in the delivery ward; even if IU monitors the labouring women, it could be perceived as a discomfort and even as an“ obstetric violence”, because it is a young technique, not often well "accepted". A group of clinicians aimed at obtain an informed consent from patients, prior to perform a translabial ultrasound (TU). The aim of this study was to evaluate the acceptance of both translabial and transabdominal IU. METHODS: In this study, performed at the University Hospital of Bari (Unit of Obstetrics and Gynecology), were enrolled 103 patients in the first or second stage of labor in singleton cephalic presentation. A statistical frequency and an association analysis were performed. As a significant result, we consider the peace of mind/satisfaction and the” obstetric violence”. IU was performed both transabdominal and translabial to determine the presentation, head positions, angle of progression and head perineum distance. During the first and second stage of labor, the ASIUG questionnaires (Apulia study intrapartum ultrasonography group) were administered. RESULTS: 74 (71, 84%) patients underwent IU and 29 had a vaginal examination (28, 15%). Significant less “violence” has been experienced with a IU (73 out 74/98, 65%) and only one person (1 /1, 35%) recorded that. On the contrary, 10 patients (10/29) perceived that “violence” (34, 48%) while 19 (65, 52%) did not respond on a similar way, after a vaginal examination (VE). More patients felt satisfaction (71 out 74/95, 95%) with the use of IU and only 3 (3/4, 05%) felt unease. A different picture was evident in the vaginal examination group. Only 17 patients (17 out 29/58, 62%) felt comfort while 12 (41, 38%) felt unease. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, IU use is well accepted by most of patients, because it could reassure women about their fetal condition. Moreover, they can see the fetus on the screen, while the obstetrician is performing the US and this is important for a visual feedback, in comparison with the classical VE.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10590726
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105907262023-10-24 Intrapartum ultrasound and mother acceptance: A study with informed consent and questionnaire Malvasi, Antonio Damiani, Gianluca Raffaello DI Naro, Edoardo Vitagliano, Amerigo Dellino, Miriam Achiron, Reuven Ioannis, Kosmas Vimercati, Antonella Gaetani, Maria Cicinelli, Ettore Vinciguerra, Marina Ricci, Ilaria Tinelli, Andrea Baldini, Giorgio Maria Silvestris, Erica Trojano, Giuseppe Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X Obstetrics and Maternal Fetal Medicine INTRODUCTION: Intrapartum ultrasound (IU) is used in the delivery ward; even if IU monitors the labouring women, it could be perceived as a discomfort and even as an“ obstetric violence”, because it is a young technique, not often well "accepted". A group of clinicians aimed at obtain an informed consent from patients, prior to perform a translabial ultrasound (TU). The aim of this study was to evaluate the acceptance of both translabial and transabdominal IU. METHODS: In this study, performed at the University Hospital of Bari (Unit of Obstetrics and Gynecology), were enrolled 103 patients in the first or second stage of labor in singleton cephalic presentation. A statistical frequency and an association analysis were performed. As a significant result, we consider the peace of mind/satisfaction and the” obstetric violence”. IU was performed both transabdominal and translabial to determine the presentation, head positions, angle of progression and head perineum distance. During the first and second stage of labor, the ASIUG questionnaires (Apulia study intrapartum ultrasonography group) were administered. RESULTS: 74 (71, 84%) patients underwent IU and 29 had a vaginal examination (28, 15%). Significant less “violence” has been experienced with a IU (73 out 74/98, 65%) and only one person (1 /1, 35%) recorded that. On the contrary, 10 patients (10/29) perceived that “violence” (34, 48%) while 19 (65, 52%) did not respond on a similar way, after a vaginal examination (VE). More patients felt satisfaction (71 out 74/95, 95%) with the use of IU and only 3 (3/4, 05%) felt unease. A different picture was evident in the vaginal examination group. Only 17 patients (17 out 29/58, 62%) felt comfort while 12 (41, 38%) felt unease. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, IU use is well accepted by most of patients, because it could reassure women about their fetal condition. Moreover, they can see the fetus on the screen, while the obstetrician is performing the US and this is important for a visual feedback, in comparison with the classical VE. Elsevier 2023-10-12 /pmc/articles/PMC10590726/ /pubmed/37876768 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eurox.2023.100246 Text en © 2023 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Obstetrics and Maternal Fetal Medicine
Malvasi, Antonio
Damiani, Gianluca Raffaello
DI Naro, Edoardo
Vitagliano, Amerigo
Dellino, Miriam
Achiron, Reuven
Ioannis, Kosmas
Vimercati, Antonella
Gaetani, Maria
Cicinelli, Ettore
Vinciguerra, Marina
Ricci, Ilaria
Tinelli, Andrea
Baldini, Giorgio Maria
Silvestris, Erica
Trojano, Giuseppe
Intrapartum ultrasound and mother acceptance: A study with informed consent and questionnaire
title Intrapartum ultrasound and mother acceptance: A study with informed consent and questionnaire
title_full Intrapartum ultrasound and mother acceptance: A study with informed consent and questionnaire
title_fullStr Intrapartum ultrasound and mother acceptance: A study with informed consent and questionnaire
title_full_unstemmed Intrapartum ultrasound and mother acceptance: A study with informed consent and questionnaire
title_short Intrapartum ultrasound and mother acceptance: A study with informed consent and questionnaire
title_sort intrapartum ultrasound and mother acceptance: a study with informed consent and questionnaire
topic Obstetrics and Maternal Fetal Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10590726/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37876768
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eurox.2023.100246
work_keys_str_mv AT malvasiantonio intrapartumultrasoundandmotheracceptanceastudywithinformedconsentandquestionnaire
AT damianigianlucaraffaello intrapartumultrasoundandmotheracceptanceastudywithinformedconsentandquestionnaire
AT dinaroedoardo intrapartumultrasoundandmotheracceptanceastudywithinformedconsentandquestionnaire
AT vitaglianoamerigo intrapartumultrasoundandmotheracceptanceastudywithinformedconsentandquestionnaire
AT dellinomiriam intrapartumultrasoundandmotheracceptanceastudywithinformedconsentandquestionnaire
AT achironreuven intrapartumultrasoundandmotheracceptanceastudywithinformedconsentandquestionnaire
AT ioanniskosmas intrapartumultrasoundandmotheracceptanceastudywithinformedconsentandquestionnaire
AT vimercatiantonella intrapartumultrasoundandmotheracceptanceastudywithinformedconsentandquestionnaire
AT gaetanimaria intrapartumultrasoundandmotheracceptanceastudywithinformedconsentandquestionnaire
AT cicinelliettore intrapartumultrasoundandmotheracceptanceastudywithinformedconsentandquestionnaire
AT vinciguerramarina intrapartumultrasoundandmotheracceptanceastudywithinformedconsentandquestionnaire
AT ricciilaria intrapartumultrasoundandmotheracceptanceastudywithinformedconsentandquestionnaire
AT tinelliandrea intrapartumultrasoundandmotheracceptanceastudywithinformedconsentandquestionnaire
AT baldinigiorgiomaria intrapartumultrasoundandmotheracceptanceastudywithinformedconsentandquestionnaire
AT silvestriserica intrapartumultrasoundandmotheracceptanceastudywithinformedconsentandquestionnaire
AT trojanogiuseppe intrapartumultrasoundandmotheracceptanceastudywithinformedconsentandquestionnaire