Ethics, Abortion Access, and Emergency Care Post-Dobbs: The Gray Areas.

Clinical management of emergency pregnancy care, such as ectopic pregnancy or heavy bleeding with pregnancy of unknown location, includes upholding legal and ethical standards. For health care providers unwilling to provide evidence-based life-saving abortion care due to personal beliefs, clear guidance dictates disclosure of these limitations to the patient and colleagues, followed by immediate referral for appropriate care. However, this decision-making pathway may not be engaged due to a variety of factors: providers' beliefs preclude adherence to referral responsibilities, political discourse confuses patients as to their options and rights, and a constantly changing state and national legal landscape leads providers to question their ability to practice to their full scope of clinical care. Although this disruption of evidence-based standard of care existed pre-Dobbs, the moral disorder is now heightened. This Clinical Rounds highlights a patient vignette describing the risks of abortion restrictions for patients and providers alike, particularly when an individual provider's concerns for violating institutional guidelines sets a precedent for nursing response and forecloses on collaborative input or ethics consultation. The history of physician-only abortion exceptionalism and exclusion of nurses and midwives despite a significant history of nurses and midwives in abortion care grounds an argument for focusing on the impact of unethical and substandard care on the interprofessional care team leading to moral distress and negative patient outcomes. Patient-centered models of care, such as frameworks common in nursing and midwifery, offer opportunities to consider how all providers practicing to their full scope in interprofessional and collaborative ways, such as in emergency rooms and labor departments, might mitigate obstructions to abortion care that risk pregnant people's lives.

Educational Pelvic Examinations Under Anesthesia: Recommendations for Clinicians and Learners.

Professional directives are unwavering: educational intimate exams should only ever occur with patients' explicit consent. This article describes the current clinical, educational, and ethical landscape of educational pelvic examinations under anesthesia, underscores the imperative that these exams only ever occur with patients' explicit consent, and offers accessible modifications to students' involvement in these exams.

Consent in Pelvic Care.

Consent is a clear dialogue between individuals to engage in a specific activity. Expectations for consent to intimate examinations in health care should be equal to, if not exceed, expectations for intimate interactions in society. In reality, current definitions of consent in health care vary. These blurry definitions lead to individualized interpretation, incomplete fulfillment, and opportunities for misunderstanding by both patient and health care provider. If a patient does not believe they have consented to an examination or procedure, they are likely to rightfully identify with one of consent's antonyms, assault. Within the field of gynecology, a history of misogyny, racism, and classism illuminates abhorrent contexts of assault disguised as care. Similar practices persist in the modern application of pelvic care, ranging from overt sexual assault to coercion disguised as guidance. Health care providers and students who seek to improve consent practices can look to evidence-based frameworks such as trauma-informed care and shared decision making, both of which are embraced widely by professional organizations. These approaches often take precedence during the first pelvic examination; care for people who are lesbian, bisexual, queer, transgender, or nonbinary; and care for anyone with a known history of sexual assault; they can be easily extrapolated to all intimate examinations. Beyond obtaining consent for the examination itself, health care providers must also intentionally obtain consent to include students in care and openly discuss new universal recommendations for chaperone presence. Scripting for common procedures, such as bimanual examinations for pelvic care or cervical examinations in labor, allows health care providers to practice trauma-informed language, include evidence-based guidance, and avoid unintentional bias. Contemporary providers of intimate pelvic care must work to understand and strengthen the definition of consent and ensure its realization in practice.

Shared Decision-Making Framework for Pelvic Examinations in Asymptomatic, Nonpregnant Patients.

Controversy exists regarding whether to perform pelvic examinations for asymptomatic, nonpregnant patients. However, several professional organizations support the notion that health care providers should no longer recommend that asymptomatic patients receive a yearly pelvic examination. At minimum, health care providers must respect patients' autonomy in decision making around this examination and initiate a joint discussion about whether to proceed with a pelvic examination. Shared decision making is a model used in other aspects of medicine that can aid such discussions. This model recognizes two experts in these clinical encounters-the health care provider is the expert regarding medical information and the patient is the expert regarding their values, preferences, and lived experiences. When shared decision making is used, not only is each expert valued for their knowledge, but the power differential shifts to a shared power model. This commentary aims to educate about shared decision making, explain why shared decision making is appropriate to use when discussing whether to perform a pelvic examination, and provide a framework for using shared decision making in discussing whether to proceed with a pelvic examination with asymptomatic, nonpregnant patients.

Perspectives on Promoting Hospital Primary Vaginal Birth: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: One in three women will deliver by cesarean, a procedure that can be life saving, but which also carries short- and long-term risks. There is growing interest in preventing primary cesarean deliveries, while optimizing the health of the mother and infant. The primary aim of this study was to use participatory action strategies and ethnographic interview data collected from diverse stakeholders in birth (caregivers, women, policymakers) about facilitators and barriers to the achievement of primary vaginal birth in first-time mothers in hospital settings. The secondary aim was to use the findings to identify strategies to promote primary vaginal birth and future areas of research. METHODS: Individual and small group interviews were conducted with caregivers and policymakers (N = 79) and first-time mothers (N = 24) at a northeastern hospital. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using Atlas.ti. RESULTS: Four broad themes were identified: 1) preparation for childbirth, 2) early labor management, 3) caregiver knowledge and practice style, and 4) birth environment (physical, cultural/emotional). The first two were closely linked from caregivers' perspectives. If the woman was not prepared for childbirth, it was perceived she would be more likely to present to the hospital in early labor. Once there, it was hard to prevent admission and interventions. A woman's knowledge and confidence were perceived as powerful mediators for vaginal birth. CONCLUSION: Caregivers and first-time mothers identified early labor management and childbirth preparation as important factors to promote primary vaginal birth in hospital settings. Both deserve further inquiry as potential strategies to decrease rising cesarean delivery rates.

"The midwifery two-step": a study on evidence-based midwifery practice.

INTRODUCTION: To date, there has been little documentation of how practice-based midwifery networks in the United States might influence the transfer and development of knowledge in childbearing and women's health care. The first phase of this participatory action research project was to conduct a qualitative study with a community of midwifery practices to understand their perspectives on evidence-based practice and how an organized network could facilitate their work. METHODS: Midwives within the community of interest were invited by letter or e-mail to participate in individual or small group interviews about knowledge transfer, primary concerns of evidence-based practice, and potential for a midwifery practice-based research network. Participatory action research strategies and organizational ethnographic approaches to data collection were used to guide qualitative interviews. RESULTS: Eight midwifery practices enrolled in the study with 23 midwives participating in interviews. They attended births at 2 hospitals in the community. Two broad areas of discourse about evidence-based practice were identified: 1) challenges from influential persons, finances and resources, and the cultural perception of midwifery, and 2) strategies to foster best practice in the face of those challenges. The midwives believed a research network could be useful in learning collectively about their practices and in the support of their work. DISCUSSION: Evidence-based practice is a goal but also has many challenges in everyday implementation. Practice-based research networks hold promise to support clinicians to examine the evidence and form strong coalitions to foster best clinical practice. The second phase of this study will work with this community of midwives to explore collective strategies to examine and improve practice.

Adherence and its measurement in phase 2/3 microbicide trials.

Adherence optimization and measurement have emerged as critically challenging issues for clinical trials of topical microbicides. Although microbicide trials have routinely collected adherence data, their utilization in trial design, implementation, and interpretation has been inconsistent. Drawing on data-driven presentations from several focused meetings, this paper synthesizes lessons from past microbicide trials and provides recommendations for future trials of microbicide and other HIV prevention technologies. First, it describes four purposes for adherence data collection, with particular attention to intention-to-treat versus adherence-adjusted analyses for determining effectiveness. Second, the microbicide field's experiences with adherence measures and data collection modes are discussed, including the strengths and weaknesses of various options and approaches for improving measurement. Then, several approaches to optimizing trial participants' adherence are presented. The paper concludes with a set of recommendations for immediate use or further research.