Leveraging In Situ Simulation for Implementation of Teleobstetric Consultation Services in Rural and Community Hospitals.

Background: Our institution implemented acute-care obstetric (OB) telemedicine (TeleOB) to address rural disparities across our health system. We sought to determine whether in situ simulations with embedded TeleOB consultation increase participants' comfort managing OB emergencies and comfort with and likelihood of using TeleOB. Methods: Rural site care teams participated in multidisciplinary in situ OB emergency simulations. Physicians in OB and neonatology at the referral center assisted via telemedicine consultation. Participants were surveyed before and after the simulations and six months later regarding their experience during the simulations. Results: Participants reported increased comfort with TeleOB activation, indications, and workflow processes, as well as increased comfort managing OB emergencies. Participants also reported significantly increased likelihood of using TeleOB in the future. Conclusions: Consistent with previous work, in situ simulation with embedded telemedicine consultations is an effective approach to facilitate telemedicine implementation and promote use by rural clinicians.

Second Victim Experiences of Health Care Learners and the Influence of the Training Environment on Postevent Adaptation.

Objective: To investigate the experience of medical and graduate learners with second victim experience (SVE) after medical errors or adverse patient outcomes, including impact on training and identification of factors that shape their postevent recovery. Patients and Methods: The validated Second Victim Experience and Support Tool-Revised (SVEST-R), Physician Well-Being Index, and supplemental open-ended questions were administered to multidisciplinary health care learners between April 8, 2022, and May 30, 2022, across a large academic health institution. Open-ended responses were qualitatively analyzed for iterative themes related to impact of SVE on the training experience. Results: Of the 206 survey respondents, 144 answered at least 1 open-ended question, with 62.1% (n=91) reporting at least 1 SVE. Participants discussed a wide range of SVEs and indicated that their postevent response was influenced by their training environment. Lack of support from supervisors and staff exacerbated high stress situations. Some trainees felt blamed and unsupported after a traumatic experience. Others emphasized that positive training experiences and supportive supervisors helped them grow and regain confidence. Learners described postevent processing strategies helpful to their recovery. Some, however, felt disincentivized from seeking support. Conclusion: This multidisciplinary study of learners found that the training environment was influential in postevent recovery. Our findings support the need for the inclusion of education on SVEs and adaptive coping mechanisms as part of health care professional educational curriculums. Educators and health care staff may benefit from enhanced education on best practices to support trainees after stressful or traumatic patient events.

Virtual Obstetric Hospitalist Support for Obstetric Emergencies and Deliveries: The Mayo Clinic Experience.

Objective: To implement use of obstetric (OB) hospitalist telemedicine services (TeleOB) to support clinicians facing OB emergencies in low-resource hospital settings. Methods: TeleOB was staffed by OB hospitalists working at a tertiary maternity center. The service was available via real-time high-definition audio/video technology for providers at 17 outlying hospitals across a health system spanning two states. The initial 25 service activations are described. Results: TeleOB supported 17 deliveries, two postpartum emergency department (ED) consultations, and four antenatal ED consultations. In 10 of 17 (59%) deliveries, teleneonatology was jointly activated to support neonatal resuscitation. Sixteen (94%) deliveries occurred in multiparas, and five (29%) resulted from spontaneous preterm labor. Eighty percent (20/25) of activations occurred in facilities without maternity services. Conclusions: A TeleOB service staffed by OB hospitalists successfully supports hospitals in an integrated health care system. TeleOB is feasible for support of hospitals with no delivery facilities or with limited maternity care resources.

Efficacy of Rubella Vaccination after Co-Inoculation with Rhogam.

Congenital rubella syndrome is a constellation of birth defects that can have devastating consequences, impacting approximately 100,000 births worldwide each year. The incidence is much lower in countries that routinely vaccinate their population. In the US, postnatal immunization of susceptible women is an important epidemiological strategy for the prevention of rubella as the Center for Disease Control (CDC) does not recommend administering this vaccine during pregnancy due to its nature as a live attenuated virus vaccine. However, concerns that the co-administration of rubella vaccine with other immunoglobins (i.e., Rhogam) could compromise vaccine efficacy has produced warnings that can delay the administration of rubella vaccination postpartum, leaving women susceptible to the disease in subsequent pregnancies. We aimed to address whether the co-administration of the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine and Rhogam decreased antibody responses compared to those receiving only MMR vaccination. This retrospective cohort study utilized clinical data from 78 subjects who received the MMR vaccine and Rhogam after delivery and 45 subjects who received the MMR vaccine alone. Maternal demographics, pregnancy complications and rubella status at the start of a subsequent pregnancy were recorded for analysis. Overall, the two cohorts had similar baseline characteristics; however, lower parity was noted in the participants that received both MMR vaccination and Rhogam. Making assessments based on maternal antibody IgG index for rubella during the next pregnancy, we observed that 88% of the Rhogam + MMR vaccine group had positive serology scores, which was not significantly different from the 80% rate in the MMR-vaccine-only cohort (p = 0.2). In conclusion, no differences were observed in rubella immunity status in subsequent pregnancies in those mothers given both the MMR vaccine and Rhogam concurrently. Given these findings, warnings against co-administration of vaccines in combination with Rhogam appear unwarranted.

Influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on prenatal and postpartum patient experiences and well-being.

BACKGROUND: It has yet to be fully elucidated how differing populations of obstetric patients adapted to the disruptions in perinatal care and postpartum support from the COVID-19 pandemic. We surveyed an enriched sample of socioeconomically advantaged patients to understand the influence of COVID-19 on their perinatal care experience, well-being, and coping. METHODS: We surveyed pregnant and postpartum patients (n = 6140) at a large academic medical center in the Midwest of the United States using the Coronavirus and Perinatal Experiences instrument in Spring 2021. RESULTS: The survey was sent to 6141 pregnant and postpartum patients; 1180 (17.8%) respondents completed the survey, including 256 who were pregnant and 834 postpartum. Most pregnant patients experienced no changes in their prenatal care with 16.5% indicating somewhat worsened care. In the postpartum cohort, 37.5% stated their care had somewhat worsened. In describing influences on stress and mental health, 58.1% of postpartum respondents stated it was moderately, and 17.4% significantly, worse. The pandemic had a somewhat or moderately negative influence for 72.7% of respondents, with 11.0% stating these effects were extremely negative. Both cohorts characterized a range of coping strategies, most commonly, talking with friends and family (76.3%). CONCLUSION(S): Even among this sample of socioeconomically advantaged patients, respondents indicated that the pandemic disrupted many facets of their medical care and daily life, especially social activities and postpartum support. Our findings suggest that counseling on coping and adaptation strategies for stressors and increased health systems support be part of perinatal care during public health emergencies for all demographic groups.

Effect of an oxytocin protocol on secondary uterotonic use in patients undergoing Cesarean delivery.

PURPOSE: Protocol-driven oxytocin regimens can reduce oxytocin administration compared with a nonprotocol free-flow continuous infusion. Our aim was to compare secondary uterotonic use between a modified "rule of threes" oxytocin protocol and a free-flow continuous oxytocin infusion after Cesarean delivery. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective before-and-after study to compare patients who underwent Cesarean delivery between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2013 (preprotocol) with patients who underwent Cesarean delivery between 1 January 2015 and 31 August 2017 (postprotocol). The preprotocol group received free-flow oxytocin administration and the postprotocol group received oxytocin according to a modified rule of threes algorithm. The primary outcome was secondary uterotonic use and the secondary outcomes included blood transfusion, hemoglobin value < 8 g·dL-1, and estimated blood loss. RESULTS: In total, 4,010 Cesarean deliveries were performed in 3,637 patients (2,262 preprotocol and 1,748 postprotocol). The odds of receiving secondary uterotonic drugs were increased in the postprotocol group (odds ratio [OR], 1.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04 to 1.70; P = 0.02). Patients in the postprotocol group were less likely to receive a blood transfusion. Nevertheless, the two groups were similar for the composite end point of transfusion or hemoglobin < 8 g·dL-1 (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.11; P = 0.25). The odds of an estimated blood loss greater than 1,000 mL were reduced in the postprotocol group (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.84; P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients in the modified rule of threes oxytocin protocol group were more likely to receive a secondary uterotonic than those in the preprotocol group. Estimated blood loss and transfusion outcomes were similar.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les schémas thérapeutiques d'ocytocine basés sur un protocole peuvent réduire l'administration d'ocytocine par rapport à une perfusion continue en débit libre hors protocole. Notre objectif était de comparer l'utilisation secondaires d'agents utérotoniques entre un protocole modifié d'ocytocine en « règle de trois ¼ et une perfusion continue d'ocytocine à débit libre après un accouchement par césarienne. MéTHODE: Nous avons mené une étude rétrospective avant-après pour comparer les personnes ayant bénéficié d'une césarienne entre le 1er janvier 2010 et le 31 décembre 2013 (pré-protocole) avec les personnes ayant subi une césarienne entre le 1er janvier 2015 et le 31 août 2017 (post-protocole). Le groupe pré-protocole a reçu une administration d'ocytocine en débit libre et le groupe post-protocole a reçu de l'ocytocine selon un algorithme de règle de trois modifié. Le critère d'évaluation principal était l'utilisation secondaire d'agents utérotoniques et les critères d'évaluation secondaires incluaient la transfusion sanguine, un indice d'hémoglobine < 8 g·dL­1 et les pertes de sang estimées. RéSULTATS: Au total, 4010 accouchements par césarienne ont été réalisés chez 3637 patient·es (2262 pré-protocole et 1748 post-protocole). Les chances de recevoir des médicaments utérotoniques secondaires étaient plus élevées dans le groupe post-protocole (rapport de cotes [RC], 1,33; intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 %, 1,04 à 1,70; P = 0,02). Les patient·es du groupe post-protocole étaient moins susceptibles de recevoir une transfusion sanguine. Néanmoins, les deux groupes étaient similaires en ce qui touchait au critère d'évaluation composite de transfusion ou d'hémoglobine < 8 g·dL­1 (RC, 0,86; IC 95, 0,66 à 1,11; P = 0,25). Les risques d'une perte de sang estimée supérieure à 1000 mL ont été réduits dans le groupe post-protocole (RC, 0,64; IC 95 %, 0,50 à 0,84; P = 0,001). CONCLUSION: Les patient·es du groupe du protocole d'ocytocine en règle de trois modifiée étaient plus susceptibles de recevoir un utérotonique secondaire que les personnes du groupe pré-protocole. Les pertes sanguines estimées et les résultats transfusionnels étaient similaires.

Use of Obstetric and Gynecologic Hospitalists Is Associated With Decreased Severe Maternal Morbidity in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of obstetric and gynecologic (Ob/Gyn) hospitalists and determine if an association exists between the presence of Ob/Gyn hospitalists and severe maternal morbidity (SMM). METHODS: This observational study included data from hospitals listed in the USA TODAY 's 2019 article titled, "Deadly deliveries: Childbirth complication rates at maternity hospitals." Telephone and email surveys of staff in these hospitals identified the presence or absence of continuous providers in the hospital 24 hours, 7 days a week (24/7 coverage) and the types of providers who are employed, then compared these responses with the SMM cited by USA TODAY . RESULTS: Eight hundred ten hospitals were contacted, with participation from 614 labor and delivery units for a response rate of 75.8%. Fifty-seven percent of units were staffed with 24/7 coverage, with 46% of hospitals' coverage primarily provided by an Ob/Gyn hospitalist and 54% primarily by a nonhospitalist OB/Gyn provider. The SMM and presence of 24/7 coverage increased with the level of neonatal care and delivery volume. Of hospitals with 24/7 coverage, those that primarily used Ob/Gyn hospitalists had a lower SMM for all mothers (1.7 versus 2.0, P = 0.014) and for low-income mothers (1.9 versus 2.30, P = 0.007) than those who primarily used nonhospitalist OB/Gyn providers. CONCLUSIONS: Severe maternal morbidity increases with delivery volume, level of neonatal care, and 24/7 coverage. Of hospitals with 24/7 coverage, units that staff with Ob/Gyn hospitalists have lower levels of SMM than those that use nonhospitalist Ob/Gyn providers.

Impact of labor characteristics on maternal and neonatal outcomes of labor: A machine-learning model.

INTRODUCTION: Since Friedman's seminal publication on laboring women, numerous publications have sought to define normal labor progress. However, there is paucity of data on contemporary labor cervicometry incorporating both maternal and neonatal outcomes. The objective of this study is to establish intrapartum prediction models of unfavorable labor outcomes using machine-learning algorithms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consortium on Safe Labor is a large database consisting of pregnancy and labor characteristics from 12 medical centers in the United States. Outcomes, including maternal and neonatal outcomes, were retrospectively collected. We defined primary outcome as the composite of following unfavorable outcomes: cesarean delivery in active labor, postpartum hemorrhage, intra-amniotic infection, shoulder dystocia, neonatal morbidity, and mortality. Clinical and obstetric parameters at admission and during labor progression were used to build machine-learning risk-prediction models based on the gradient boosting algorithm. RESULTS: Of 228,438 delivery episodes, 66,586 were eligible for this study. Mean maternal age was 26.95 ± 6.48 years, mean parity was 0.92 ± 1.23, and mean gestational age was 39.35 ± 1.13 weeks. Unfavorable labor outcome was reported in 14,439 (21.68%) deliveries. Starting at a cervical dilation of 4 cm, the area under receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) of prediction models increased from 0.75 (95% confidence interval, 0.75-0.75) to 0.89 (95% confidence interval, 0.89-0.90) at a dilation of 10 cm. Baseline labor risk score was above 35% in patients with unfavorable outcomes compared to women with favorable outcomes, whose score was below 25%. CONCLUSION: Labor risk score is a machine-learning-based score that provides individualized and dynamic alternatives to conventional labor charts. It predicts composite of adverse birth, maternal, and neonatal outcomes as labor progresses. Therefore, it can be deployed in clinical practice to monitor labor progress in real time and support clinical decisions.

Medical Malpractice Lawsuits Involving Trainees in Obstetrics and Gynecology in the USA.

BACKGROUND: While the liability risks for obstetrics and gynecology (ob/gyn) physicians are widely recognized, little is known about how trainees have been involved in ob/gyn lawsuits. OBJECTIVES: To characterize involvement of trainees in malpractice lawsuits related to ob/gyn. METHODS: The legal database Westlaw was utilized to collect ob/gyn-related malpractice lawsuits involving trainees reported from 1986 to 2020 in the USA. OUTCOME: Forty-six malpractice cases involving ob/gyn trainees were identified, including 34 cases related to obstetrics and 12 to gynecology. There were 11 cases alleging lack of informed consent, including 7 cases alleging lack of consent for trainee involvement. Of the 34 obstetrics cases, 27 related to procedural complications, 17 to treatment, 13 to diagnosis, and 4 to informed consent. Of these, 17 were decided in favor of the physician, 6 resulted in findings of negligence, 9 had unknown outcomes, and 3 ended in settlement. For the 6 cases ending in a finding of negligence, the mean award was $2,174,472 compared to $685,000 for those that were settled. Of the 12 gynecology cases, 8 related to procedural complications, 7 to informed consent, 3 to diagnosis, and 2 to treatment. Of these, 6 were decided in favor of the physician, 3 resulted in findings of negligence, and 3 had unknown outcomes. For the cases ending in a finding of negligence, the mean award was $465,000. CONCLUSIONS AND OUTLOOK: This review of malpractice cases highlights types of situations in which trainees are sued and reveals the importance of designing curriculum around faculty training and supervision regarding trainee involvement in patient care.

"I had so many life-changing decisions I had to make without support": a qualitative analysis of women's pregnant and postpartum experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has posed profound challenges for pregnant patients and their families. Studies conducted early in the pandemic found that pregnant individuals reported increased mental health concerns in response to pandemic-related stress. Many obstetric practices changed their healthcare delivery models, further impacting the experiences of pregnant patients. We conducted a survey study to explore the ways in which COVID-19 impacted the lives of pregnant and newly postpartum people. METHODS: A mixed-methods survey was distributed to all patients ≥18 years old who were pregnant between January 1st, 2020 - April 28, 2021 in a large Midwest health system. Open-ended survey responses were analyzed for common themes using standard qualitative methodology. RESULTS: Among the 1182 survey respondents, 647 women provided an open-ended response. Of these, 77% were in the postpartum period. The majority of respondents identified as white, were partnered or married, and owned their own home. Respondents reported feeling greater uncertainty, social isolation, as though they had limited social and practical support, and negative mental health effects as a result of the pandemic. Many cited sudden or arbitrary changes to their medical care as a contributing factor. Though in the minority, some respondents also reported benefits from the changes to daily life, including perceived improvements to medical care, better work-life balance, and opportunities for new perspectives. CONCLUSIONS: This large qualitative dataset provides insight into how healthcare policy and lifestyle changes impacted pregnant and postpartum people. Respondents expressed similar levels of uncertainty and mental health concerns compared to other cohorts but less overall positivity. Our findings suggest greater attention be given to the impact of pandemic-related stress on pregnant and postpartum women. As the pandemic continues, these data identify areas where investment in additional support may have the greatest impact.

Understanding the Second Victim Experience Among Multidisciplinary Providers in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine the prevalence of second victim experience (SVE) among obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) clinical and nonclinical healthcare workers and compare healthcare workers who did and did not identify as a second victim (SV) in the last year. METHODS: The validated Second Victim Experience and Support Tool and additional questions designed to explore SVE topics specific to OBGYN healthcare workers were administered to a multidisciplinary group. RESULTS: Of 571 individuals sent a survey link, 205 completed the survey: 117 worked in obstetrics (OB), 73 in gynecology (GYN), and 15 in both areas. Overall, 44.8% of respondents identified as an SV sometime during their career, 18.8% within the last 12 months. Among nonclinical staff respondents, 26.7% identified as an SV during their career and 13.3% in the last 12 months. Respondents who identified as an SV in the last 12 months reported experiencing significantly more psychological and physical distress, a greater degree to which colleague and institutional support were perceived as inadequate, decreased professional self-efficacy, and increased turnover intentions. The most common events identified as likely triggers for SVE were fetal or neonatal loss (72.7%) and maternal death (68.2%) in OB and patient accusations or complaints (69.3%) in GYN. CONCLUSIONS: Among survey respondents, there was a high prevalence of SVs in OBGYN staff, distributed equally between OB and GYN. Nonclinical healthcare workers also identified as SVs. The OBGYN departments should consider using the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool to screen for potential SV among their healthcare workers to provide additional support after events.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Obstetricians/Gynecologists.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on obstetricians/gynecologists (OB/GYNs). PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: A 49-item survey was distributed to OB/GYNs through the websites and electronic mailing lists of professional OB/GYN organizations. The survey was open from June 22, 2020, through November 22, 2020. Of the 122 initiated surveys, 89 were completed (73.0% completion rate); 72 respondents answered at least one open-ended question and were included for qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Respondents reported policy changes, limited personal protective equipment availability, patient compliance with safety protocols and personal protective equipment use, staff shortages, and concerns about COVID-19 exposure as primary stressors related to the pandemic. Respondents felt that the pandemic had a negative professional impact on their relationships with patients and colleagues. Workplace and pandemic stressors resulted in feelings of anxiety and frustration; physical effects were also reported. Some respondents indicated that they were considering early retirement or leaving the profession as a result of the pandemic, which suggests that OB/GYNs may be at increased risk for burnout. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic will have important long-term effects on OB/GYN well-being and workforce retention. Proactive support for OB/GYNs is needed to combat burnout and counteract workforce attrition. Implementing peer support programs that promote healthy emotional processing following adverse events may mitigate these feelings and reduce OB/GYN burnout.

Evaluation of a Second Victim Peer Support Program on Perceptions of Second Victim Experiences and Supportive Resources in Pediatric Clinical Specialties Using the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (SVEST).

PURPOSE: Pediatric healthcare professionals (HCPs) may experience events that lead to psychological distress or second victim experiences (SVEs). This project evaluates the impact of a newly implemented peer support program on SVEs and perceptions of supportive resources among pediatric HCPs. DESIGN AND METHODS: A second victim (SV) peer support program was implemented in the pediatric inpatient and intensive care units in September 2019. Multidisciplinary HCPs in these units were invited to participate in an anonymous survey that included the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool before and one-year after implementation. The survey assessed HCPs' SVEs, desired support, and perceptions of the peer support program. RESULTS: 52.0% (194/373) completed the pre-implementation survey, and 43.9% (177/403) completed the post-implementation survey. At both timepoints, participants reported SV-related psychosocial distress, physical distress, or low professional self-efficacy; the most desired support was 'a respected peer to discuss the details of what happened'. Following implementation of the peer support program, HCPs were significantly more likely to have heard of the term 'second victim' (51.8 vs. 74.0%; p < 0.001) and to have felt like there were adequate resources to support SVs (35.8% vs. 89.1%; p < 0.001). In the post-implementation survey, most respondents indicated a likelihood to use the program for themselves (65.7%) or colleagues (84.6%) after involvement in future traumatic clinical events. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a peer support program significantly influenced awareness and perceptions of support available for SV-related distress. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Peer support programs should be implemented to help HCPs navigate SVEs and decrease SV-related turnover intentions.

Second Victim Experience among OBGYN Trainees: What Is Their Desired Form of Support?

OBJECTIVES: Physician trainees in obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) experience unexpected outcomes similar to those of supervising physicians. A relative lack of experience and perspective may make them more vulnerable to second victim experience (SVE), however. The objectives of our study were to contrast the prevalence of SVE between supervising physicians and trainees and to identify their preferred methods of support. METHODS: In 2019, the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool, a validated survey with supplemental questions, was administered to healthcare workers caring for OBGYN patients at a large academic center in the midwestern United States. RESULTS: The survey was sent to 571 healthcare workers working in OBGYN. A total of 205 healthcare workers completed the survey, including 18 (43.9% of 41) supervising physicians and 12 (48.0% of 25) resident/fellow physicians. The mean scores for the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool dimensions and outcomes were similar between the two groups. Seven (58.3%) trainees reported feeling like a second victim after an adverse patient safety event at some point in their work experience compared with 10 (55.6%) of the supervising physicians. Five (41.7%) trainees identified as a second victim in the previous 12 months compared with 3 (16.7%) supervising physicians (P = 0.21). The most common form of desired support for both groups was conversations with their peers. CONCLUSIONS: Trainees and supervising physicians are both at risk of SVE after an unexpected medical event and prefer conversations with peers as a desired form of support. Because trainees commonly encounter SVEs early in their careers, program directors should consider implementing a program for peer support after an unexpected event.

Safety of salpingectomy at time of delivery.

OBJECTIVE: The most common methods of sterilization during cesarean delivery rely on excision of a mid-segment of the fallopian tube. Contemporary data suggest ovarian cancers may originate in the fimbriae of the fallopian tube; therefore, a strategy of prophylactic salpingectomy (SL) has been adopted during gynecologic surgery. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety of SL compared to traditional mid-segment excision at time of cesarean and after vaginal delivery through change in perioperative hemoglobin (Hgb). STUDY DESIGN: We retrospectively evaluated patients undergoing sterilization concurrent with cesarean delivery or in the post-vaginal delivery period between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2017 in the Mayo Clinic Health System; a community-based practice. In order to test for non-inferiority, 30 patients in each arm (tubal ligation (TL) and SL) were required to detect a pre- and post-operative Hgb difference of 0.5 mg/dL between groups with a power of 80%. Exclusion criteria included: age <18 years, BMI >50 kg/m2, endometriosis, other concurrent surgical procedures, bleeding disorders, postpartum hemorrhage due to atony, trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC), and the presence of ovarian masses. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-two patients met inclusion criteria. There was no evidence of inferiority in either the post-vaginal delivery or the cesarean groups with a mean difference in pre- and post-op Hgb of 0.18 mg/dL (p = .99) post-cesarean and 0.04 mg/dL post-vaginal delivery with less reduction in Hgb from SL. The mean length of the procedure was 10.0 and 9.9 min (p = .005) longer for SL procedures amongst cesarean and postpartum procedures, respectively. Subgroup analyses did not demonstrate differences in blood loss between different techniques. Clamp-cut-tie techniques took longer than all other procedures in both groups. CONCLUSION: This study provides evidence that the practice of salpingectomy at the time of cesarean and post-vaginal delivery may be safe and should form the basis of prospective trials.

Second victim experiences of nurses in obstetrics and gynaecology: A Second Victim Experience and Support Tool Survey.

AIM (S): To investigate second victim experiences and supportive resources for nurses in obstetrics and gynaecology. BACKGROUND: Nurses are at risk of developing second victim experiences after exposure to work related events. METHODS: Nurses at a single institution were invited to participate in an anonymous survey that included the validated Second Victim Experience and Support Tool to assess symptoms related to second victim experiences and current and desired supportive resources. RESULTS: Of 310 nurses, 115 (37.1%) completed the survey; 74.8% had not heard of the term 'second victim'. Overall, 47.8% reported feeling like a second victim during their career and 19.1% over the previous 12 months. As a result of a second victim experience, 18.4% experienced psychological distress, 14.3% turnover intentions, 13.0% decreased professional self-efficacy, and 12.2% felt that institutional support was poor. Both clinical and non-clinical events were reported as possible triggers for second victim experiences. Peer support was the most desired form of support as reported by 95.5%. CONCLUSION(S): Nurses in obstetrics and gynaecology face clinical and non-clinical situations that lead to potential second victim experiences. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: The second victim experiences of nurses should be acknowledged, and resources should be implemented to navigate it. Educational opportunities and peer supportive interventions specific to second victim experiences should be encouraged.

Intrathecal Morphine versus Intrathecal Hydromorphone for Analgesia after Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Intrathecal opioids are routinely administered during spinal anesthesia for postcesarean analgesia. The effectiveness of intrathecal morphine for postcesarean analgesia is well established, and the use of intrathecal hydromorphone is growing. No prospective studies have compared the effectiveness of equipotent doses of intrathecal morphine versus intrathecal hydromorphone as part of a multimodal analgesic regimen for postcesarean analgesia. The authors hypothesized that intrathecal morphine would result in superior analgesia compared with intrathecal hydromorphone 24 h after delivery. METHODS: In this single-center, double-blinded, randomized trial, 138 parturients undergoing scheduled cesarean delivery were randomized to receive 150 µg of intrathecal morphine or 75 µg of intrathecal hydromorphone as part of a primary spinal anesthetic and multimodal analgesic regimen; 134 parturients were included in the analysis. The primary outcome was the numerical rating scale score for pain with movement 24 h after delivery. Static and dynamic pain scores, nausea, pruritus, degree of sedation, and patient satisfaction were assessed every 6 h for 36 h postpartum. Total opioid consumption was recorded. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in pain scores with movement at 24 h (intrathecal hydromorphone median [25th, 75th] 4 [3, 5] and intrathecal morphine 3 [2, 4.5]) or at any time point (estimated difference, 0.5; 95% CI, 0 to 1; P = 0.139). Opioid received in the first 24 h did not differ between groups (median [25th, 75th] oral morphine milligram equivalents for intrathecal hydromorphone 30 [7.5, 45.06] vs. intrathecal morphine 22.5 [14.0, 37.5], P = 0.769). From Kaplan-Meier analysis, the median time to first opioid request was 5.4 h for hydromorphone and 12.1 h for morphine (log-rank test P = 0.200). CONCLUSIONS: Although the hypothesis was that intrathecal morphine would provide superior analgesia to intrathecal hydromorphone, the results did not confirm this. At the doses studied, both intrathecal morphine and intrathecal hydromorphone provide effective postcesarean analgesia when combined with a multimodal analgesia regimen.

Use of Asynchronous Video Interviews for Selecting Obstetrics and Gynecology Residents.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of using of asynchronous video interviewing as a screening tool for obstetrics and gynecology residency selection. METHODS: This project was part of a quality-improvement effort to enhance the resident application process. Applications to a single obstetrics and gynecology residency program were scored using standardized criteria. In the 2018 Match, top-scored applicants were invited to in-person interviews, and second-tier applicants were asked to complete a three-question asynchronous video interview. Video interviews were scored and used to invite the remaining applicants for in-person interviews. In the 2019 Match, video interviewing was expanded to all applicants with top application scores, and the video score was used to determine in-person interview invitations. Applicants for 2019 were surveyed on their views regarding video interviewing. RESULTS: Half of the candidates interviewed in person in the 2018 season were screened by the video interview process compared with 82% in the 2019 season. The mean in-person interview score increased from 59.0 in 2017, before screening with asynchronous video interviews, to 62.2 in 2018 (effect size 0.50; 95% CI 0.09-0.90) In 2018, a nonsignificant correlation was seen between the video interview score and rank list percentile (r=0.22, P=.15, n=27) and in-person interview score (r=0.18, P=.12, n=46). United States Medical Licensing Examination step 1 and 2 scores were not correlated with video interview scores in either season. Most (58%) candidates indicated that the asynchronous video interview was an effective way to tell their story; however, only 42% were comfortable with the interview process. CONCLUSION: Video interviewing may have promise as a tool for program directors to use to select candidates from a competitive applicant pool by measuring important noncognitive skills. Acceptance by obstetrics and gynecology applicants was mixed.

Randomized comparison of a reduced-visit prenatal care model enhanced with remote monitoring.

BACKGROUND: Standard prenatal care, consisting of 12-14 visits per pregnancy, is expensive and resource intensive, with limited evidence supporting the structure, rhythm, or components of care. Some studies suggest a reduced-frequency prenatal care model is as safe as the standard model of care for low-risk pregnant women, but evidence is limited. We developed and evaluated an innovative, technology-enhanced, reduced prenatal visit model (OB Nest). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the acceptability and effectiveness of OB Nest, a reduced-frequency prenatal care model enhanced with remote home monitoring devices and nursing support. STUDY DESIGN: A single-center randomized controlled trial, composed of pregnant women, aged 18-36 years, recruited from an outpatient obstetric tertiary academic center in the Midwest United States. OB Nest care consisted of 8 onsite appointments with an obstetric provider; 6 virtual visits consisting of phone or online communication with an assigned nurse, supplemented with fetal Doppler and sphygmomanometer home monitoring devices; and access to an online community of pregnant women. Usual care consisted of 12 prescheduled prenatal clinic appointments with obstetric providers. Acceptability of OB Nest was measured by validated surveys of patient satisfaction with care at 36 weeks; perception of stress at 14, 24, and 36 weeks; and perceived quality of care at 36 weeks of gestation. Effectiveness was analyzed by comparing adherence to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommended routine prenatal and ancillary services, maternal and fetal safety outcomes, and healthcare utilization. RESULTS: Three hundred pregnant women at <13 weeks of gestation were recruited and randomized to OB Nest or usual care (150 in each arm) using a minimization algorithm. Demographic characteristics were similar between groups. Compared to usual care, patients in OB Nest had higher satisfaction on a 100-point validated modified Littlefield and Adams Satisfaction scale (OB Nest = 93.9% vs usual care = 78.9%, P < .01). Pregnancy-related stress, measured, on a 0-2 point PreNatal Maternal Stress validated scale, with higher scores indicating higher levels of stress, was lower among OB Nest participants at 14 weeks (OB Nest = 0.32 vs usual care = 0.41, P < .01) and at 36 weeks of gestation (OB Nest = 0.34 vs usual care = 0.40, P < .03). There was no statistical difference in perceived quality of care. Adherence to the provision of American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists prenatal services was similar in both arms. Maternal and fetal clinical outcomes were similar between groups. Total reported nursing time was higher in OB Nest (OB Nest = 171.2 minutes vs usual care = 108.2 minutes, 95% confidence interval, 48.7-77.4). CONCLUSION: OB Nest is an innovative, acceptable, and effective reduced-frequency prenatal care model. Compared to routine prenatal care, OB Nest resulted in higher patient satisfaction and lower prenatal stress, while reducing the number of appointments with clinicians and maintaining care standards for pregnant women. This program is a step toward evidence-driven prenatal care that improves patient satisfaction.