RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate prophylactic uterotonics, antifibrinolytic medications, and vasoconstrictive agents in the prevention of hemorrhage during second-trimester abortions. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase (Elsevier platform), Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews (Ovid platform), and Web of Science were searched from database creation to October 30, 2023. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, and case series evaluating pregnant individuals (between 13 0/7 and 27 6/7 weeks of gestation) who underwent dilation and evacuation and received prophylactic uterotonics (methylergonovine, carboprost, oxytocin, or misoprostol), antifibrinolytic medications (tranexamic acid), or vasoconstrictive agents (vasopressin, lidocaine with epinephrine) were included in the study. The outcomes of interest included postprocedural bleeding, rate of medications to treat bleeding, blood transfusion, reoperation, and transfer to a higher level of care for hemorrhage. METHODS: Of note, 2 authors independently screened the abstracts using the Systematic Review Data Repository. A third reviewer resolved discrepancies. The full text of accepted abstracts was retrieved and assessed for eligibility by 2 independent authors. Eligible studies were independently assessed for quality and bias by 3 authors. A consensus review resolved discrepancies. RESULTS: Among 5834 abstracts screened, 11 studies met the inclusion criteria: 5 randomized controlled trials, 3 retrospective cohort studies, and 3 case series, totaling 3857 individuals. The paucity of studies combined with the heterogeneity of included trials precluded the performance of the meta-analysis. Of note, 4 studies evaluating misoprostol were of overall low-quality evidence and primarily assessed misoprostol's use for cervical dilation. Thus, its efficacy in bleeding prophylaxis remains unclear. Moreover, 2 high-quality trials evaluating oxytocin concluded that oxytocin use resulted in decreased blood loss, without a difference in interventions to control bleeding. Furthermore, 2 studies provided moderate-quality evidence that paracervical vasopressin use decreased blood loss, particularly at advanced gestational ages, but subsequent intervention outcomes were not assessed. High-quality evidence evaluating methylergonovine found that this medication increased blood loss at the time of the procedure. CONCLUSION: Current evidence on hemorrhage prophylaxis at the time of dilation and evacuation supports the use of intravenous oxytocin or paracervical vasopressin to decrease procedural blood loss, without an associated decrease in transfusion rate or use of other interventions. Future research on outcomes by gestational age can identify subgroups with the potential to derive the most benefit.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Barriers to seeking infertility care for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, queer/questioning, and asexual (LGBTIQA+) individuals are well documented in the literature. However, little is known about military LGBTIQA+ service members seeking infertility care within the Military Health System. Approximately 6.1% of active duty U.S. service members across all branches identify as LGBTIQA+, which underscores the need for a deeper understanding of the needs of this community to support and retain service members. We therefore sought to describe the lived experiences of lesbian and gay cisgender service members in building their families in order to understand their family-building desires and potential barriers to seeking infertility care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed a survey to investigate the impact of military service on family planning. After Institutional Review Board approval, we distributed the survey throughout Walter Reed National Military Medical Center's obstetrics and gynecology clinic and posted the survey on multiple open and closed social media pages for LGBTIQA+ service members. We reported descriptive statistics of our survey and compared binary variables using the Fisher exact test. Following completion of this survey, participants could self-select to participate in semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: Sixty-eight respondents completed our survey and self-identified as either cis-male (n = 28) or cis-female (n = 40). Most respondents (67.9% cis-males, 92.5% cis-females) plan to build their families during their military commitment; however, approximately half (50.0% cis-male, 42.5% cis-female) reported a lack of support in this endeavor. Many respondents were unaware of resources that would assist in the pursuit of donor egg, donor sperm, or surrogacy (78.6% cis-males, 50.0% cis-females). Thirty-six participants elected to complete a follow-up interview. After coding the interviews, 5 themes emerged: (1) barriers to initiating care; (2) institutional barriers within the military; (3) political barriers; (4) knowledge sharing; and (5) implicit and explicit bias. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest significant barriers to LGBTIQA+ service members seeking infertility care. Overall, LGBTIQA+ service members did not feel supported by the military in building their families. Although the military has expanded access to infertility services, efforts to raise awareness and build support for LGBTIQA+ service members are warranted.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Mentorship programs have well-documented benefits to both mentees and mentors. Military medical students face unique challenges in medical school given their service-specific requirements and separate military match process. We therefore aimed to determine whether military medical students' participation in a mentorship program impacts their confidence in applying to obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN) residency. MATERIALS AND METHODS: First, a needs assessment survey regarding the use of a mentorship program was sent to medical students, residents, fellows, and attendings. A structured mentorship program was then developed for military medical students applying to OB/GYN residency based on the survey results. Mentors were randomly paired with mentees and asked to appraise curriculum vitaes, review personal statements, and perform mock interviews. Following completion of these activities, participants were sent a post-intervention questionnaire. This project was exempt by our institution's Institutional Review Board. RESULTS: Our program had 56 participants, with 29 individuals completing our post-intervention survey (response rate 51.8%). After participating in the program, 92.3% of mentors stated they plan to continue a relationship with their mentee. All the mentee respondents stated they would participate in this program again. Before participating in the program, 16.7% of mentees felt "prepared" or "extremely prepared" for the match, compared to 87.6% post-intervention. Most mentee respondents (75%) reported that this program made them a more competitive applicant. Following the mentorship program, 66.7% of participants successfully matched into OB/GYN residency. CONCLUSIONS: This reproducible, well-received intervention can be implemented to facilitate mentoring connections regardless of geographic location. As the OB/GYN specialty develops its own application process, civilian medical schools should consider adopting similar programs to aid their students in navigating the match process.
RESUMO
Purpose: We sought to evaluate physicians' baseline knowledge of fertility preservation services available to patients with a cancer diagnosis within the military health system (MHS). Methods: Data on current cancer prevalence of over 31,000 unique cancer diagnoses were obtained from a comprehensive nationwide MHS dataset. Additionally, a 22-item survey was distributed to physicians practicing within the MHS assessing knowledge of reproductive health benefits, oncofertility counseling practices, and subspecialist referral patterns. Results: From 2020 to 2022, there were 31,103 individuals of reproductive age with cancer receiving care at a military treatment facility. One hundred fourteen physicians completed our survey, 76 obstetrician gynecologists (OB/GYNs), 18 oncologists, and 20 primary care physicians (PCPs). Ninety-three percent of respondents felt conversations about fertility preservation for reproductive-aged patients with cancer were very important. A total of 66.7% of oncologists, 35.5% of OB/GYNs, and 0% of PCPs felt comfortable counseling patients on coverage. A total of 33.3% of oncologists, 29.3% of OB/GYNs, and 0% of PCPs were familiar with oncofertility Defense Health Agency guidelines. Conclusion: Primary care, OB/GYN, and oncology practitioners are well situated to provide fertility preservation counseling to all individuals with a cancer diagnosis, but differences in counseling and referral patterns and a lack of knowledge of current agency policies may impair a patient's timely access to these resources. We propose implementation of an electronic patient navigator to address gaps in oncofertility care and standardize patient counseling in the MHS. This patient-focused guide would serve as a valuable model in all types of health care settings.
Assuntos
Aconselhamento , Preservação da Fertilidade , Encaminhamento e Consulta , Humanos , Preservação da Fertilidade/métodos , Feminino , Masculino , Aconselhamento/métodos , Adulto , Médicos/psicologia , Neoplasias/complicações , Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Serviços de Saúde Militar , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Padrões de Prática Médica , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosAssuntos
Fertilização in vitro , Injeções de Esperma Intracitoplásmicas , Humanos , Injeções de Esperma Intracitoplásmicas/métodos , Feminino , Gravidez , Fertilização in vitro/métodos , Fertilização in vitro/tendências , Masculino , Infertilidade/terapia , Infertilidade/fisiopatologia , Infertilidade/diagnóstico , Taxa de Gravidez , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: A dilation and evacuation (D&E) is a safe and effective option for patients undergoing a second trimester abortion. Recent legislation and geographic restrictions threaten patients' access to this surgical procedure, prompting a call to action to strengthen abortion training. This quality improvement project aimed to assess if a standardized lecture and checklist would improve military trainee knowledge and comfort with performing D&Es. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using society recommendations and incorporating available level I to III evidence, a standardized checklist for D&Es was created to include necessary equipment, procedural steps, perioperative considerations, and potential complications. The checklist and associated lecture were presented to gynecology residents from seven of the nine military training programs. Residents completed a six-question assessment regarding comfort and knowledge in performing D&Es prior to and following the intervention. Responses were ranked on a five-point Likert scale and analyzed with the Wilcoxon sign-rank test. This project was deemed exempt by the Institutional Review Board. The standard Plan, Do, Study, Act (PDSA) methodology was used for ongoing assessment of the efficacy of this quality improvement project. RESULTS: There were 67 trainees that completed the pre-intervention assessment and 44 who completed it post-intervention, with 27 responses paired for statistical analysis. All trainees self-reported improved comfort and knowledge in all procedural aspects of D&Es, with the largest improvement observed in equipment knowledge (mean difference 1.44, P <0.001), performing procedural steps (mean difference 1.26, P <0.001), and managing complications (mean difference 1.33, P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Use of an evidence-based checklist significantly improves resident knowledge and comfort with performing second trimester D&Es. In a post Dobbs environment, the military is an appropriate proxy for larger society and training programs need to develop alternatives and adjuncts to clinical training.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: To determine whether progestin type or number of dilation and curettage procedures (D&Cs) were associated with intrauterine synechiae (IS) or pregnancy outcomes in patients conservatively treated for endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia (EIN) or endometrial cancer (EC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated patients conservatively treated for EIN or EC from 2000 to 2017 at an academic center. IS were identified hysteroscopically. We calculated proportions for categorical variables and tested associations between D&C number, progestin, and pregnancy outcomes using Pearson chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests. A post-hoc power analysis indicated sufficient power to detect livebirth. RESULTS: We analyzed 54 patients, 15 with EIN (28 %) and 39 with EC (72 %), with a mean age of 34 ± 1.2 years. Progestin treatment types included megestrol acetate (MA) (n = 24), MA with levonorgestrel intrauterine device (LngIUD) (n = 10), MA followed by LngIUD (n = 3), and LngIUD alone (n = 6). Mean number of D&Cs was 3.9 ± 0.9. Overall, 53 subjects underwent hysteroscopy; 10 (19 %) had IS. When D&Cs were grouped into 0-2, 3-4 and ≥5, each increase in D&C group had a 2.9 higher odds of IS (OR: 2.91, p = 0.04, CI: 1.05-10.02). LngIUD was associated with a nonsignificant 46 % decrease in the odds of IS (OR: 0.54, p = 0.66, CI: 0.08-2.87). Twenty-two women attempted pregnancy; 14 women achieved a total of 20 pregnancies and 9 women had total of 15 livebirths (41 % livebirth rate). The number of D&Cs and progestin treatment type were not associated with pregnancy outcomes. DISCUSSION: Among 54 patients conservatively treated for EC/EIN, nearly 20 % developed IS. However, hysteroscopic and/or fertility treatments may improve pregnancy outcomes.