Why we succeed and fail in detecting fetal growth restriction: A population-based study.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to explore the association between detection of fetal growth restriction and maternal-, healthcare provider- and organizational factors. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A historical, observational, multicentre study. All women who gave birth to a child with a birthweight <2.3rd centile from 1 September 2012 to 31 August 2015 in Zealand, Denmark, were included. The population was identified through the Danish Fetal Medicine Database. Medical charts were reviewed to obtain data regarding maternal characteristics and information on the healthcare professionals. Date of authorization for the midwives and obstetricians involved was extracted from the Danish Health Authorization Registry. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to identify predictors of antenatal detection of fetal growth restriction, and analyses were adjusted for hospital, body mass index, parity, the presence of at least one risk factor and experience of the first midwife, number of midwife visits, number of visits to a doctor, the experience of the consultant midwife or the educational level of the doctor, the number of scans and gaps in continuity of midwife-care. Antenatal detection was defined as an ultrasound estimated fetal weight <2.3rd centile (corresponding to -2 standard deviations) prior to delivery. RESULTS: Among 78 544 pregnancies, 3069 (3.9%) had a fetal growth restriction. Detection occurred in 31% of fetal growth-restricted pregnancies. Clinical experience (defined as years since graduation) of the first consultation midwife was positively associated with detection, with a hazard ratio [HR] of 1.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-1.28), for every 10 years of additional experience. The hazard of detection increased with the number of midwife consultations (HR 1.15, 95% CI 1.05-1.26) and with multiparity (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.03-1.58). After adjusting for all covariates, an unexplained difference between hospitals (P = .01) remained. CONCLUSIONS: The low-risk nullipara may constitute an overlooked group of women at increased risk of antenatal non-detection of fetal growth restriction. Being screened by experienced midwives during early pregnancy and having access to multiple midwife consultations may improve future diagnosis.

Up or down? A randomized trial comparing image orientations during transvaginal ultrasound training.

INTRODUCTION: There is no international consensus on the orientation of transvaginal ultrasound images and no evidence exists to support the superiority of one image orientation over the other. The aim of this study was to compare learning curves and skills transfer in a group of novices randomized to top-down or bottom-up image orientation, and to determine whether individual preferences for image orientation affect learning and skills transfer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 60 senior medical students, with no prior ultrasound experience, were randomized to orient the image top-down or bottom-up during training on an ultrasound simulator until attaining expert levels of performance. Participants then completed a transfer test involving a systematic ultrasound examination on a physical mannequin using real ultrasound equipment. Performance was assessed during the transfer test by two independent raters using the objective structured assessment of ultrasound skills (OSAUS) score and a global rating score. RESULTS: The bottom-up group reached the expert level with significantly fewer attempts than did the top-down group [median ± interquartile range: 4 ± 2 vs 5 ± 3] (U = 285.5, P = 0.014). The bottom-up group used less time to achieve the expert level (median ± interquartile range: 3 h 2 m ± 1 h 14 m vs 3 h 28 m ± 2 h 21 m) (U = 301.5, P = 0.029). The two groups performed similarly during the transfer test with respect to their OSAUS scores (top-down 56.7% vs bottom-up 53.2%, P = 0.13). The global rating scores were higher in the top-down group (top-down 57.1% vs bottom-up 50.0%, P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Orientation of the images bottom-up rather than top-down, led to a steeper learning curve, but had little or no impact on the subsequent transfer of skills.

Operative complications during pregnancy after gastric bypass--a register-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Late complications to bariatric surgery during pregnancy have become an area of concern. Expansion of the uterus and the following displacement of the small intestine may increase the risk of internal herniation. We wanted to estimate the risk and consequences of surgical complications during pregnancy in a national cohort of women with a history of gastric bypass surgery. METHODS: A national, register-based cohort study of all Danish women with a history of gastric bypass surgery who had given birth from 2004 to 2010 was conducted. Surgical codes registered during pregnancy and until 120 days postpartum were identified in national registers, and the individual charts were reviewed in relevant cases. RESULTS: Of 286 women giving birth, fourteen women underwent procedures that might be related to the earlier gastric bypass surgery. Three women were operated on suspicion of internal herniation. In all three cases, mesenteric defects were found, and herniation was still present in two women, one of which died postoperatively. Five women were investigated by gastroscopy or sigmoidoscopy either during or after the delivery, and in six women cholecystectomy was performed during the puerperium. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of internal herniation during pregnancy was 1 % in our study. Internal herniation may be a serious complication in pregnant women, and both the diagnosis and treatment requires handling by experienced obstetrical, radiological, and surgical staff.