Parents' Descriptions of Neonatal Palliation as a Treatment Option Prior to Periviable Delivery.

During periviable deliveries, parents are confronted with overwhelming and challenging decisions. This study aimed to qualitatively explore the language that pregnant women and important others utilize when discussing palliation, or "comfort care," as a treatment option in the context of periviability. We prospectively recruited women admitted for a threatened periviable delivery (22-25 weeks) at 2 hospitals between September 2016 and January 2018. Using a semistructured interview guide, we investigated participants' perceptions of neonatal treatment options, asking items such as "How was the choice of resuscitation presented to you?" and "What were the options presented?" Conventional content analysis was used and matrices were created to facilitate using a within- and across-case approach to identify and describe patterns. Thirty women and 16 important others were recruited in total. Participants' descriptions of treatment options included resuscitating at birth or not resuscitating. Participants further described the option to not resuscitate as "comfort care," "implicit" comfort care, "doing nothing," and "withdrawal of care." This study revealed that many parents facing periviable delivery may lack an understanding of comfort care as a neonatal treatment option, highlighting the need to improve counseling efforts in order to maximize parents' informed decision-making.

Potential Unintended Consequences Of Recent Shared Decision Making Policy Initiatives.

Shared decision making (SDM)-when clinicians and patients make medical decisions together-is moving swiftly from an ethical ideal toward widespread clinical implementation affecting millions of patients through recent policy initiatives. We argue that policy initiatives to promote SDM implementation in clinical practice carry the risk of several unintended negative consequences if limitations in defining and measuring SDM are not addressed. We urge policy makers to include prespecified definitions of desired outcomes, offer guidance on the tools used to measure SDM in the multitude of contexts in which it occurs, evaluate the impact of SDM policy initiatives over time, review that impact at regular intervals, and revise SDM measurement tools as needed.

Paternal Preferences, Perspectives, and Involvement in Perinatal Decision Making.

IMPORTANCE: Despite increasing attention to the importance of father involvement during pregnancy, the literature on fathers' roles in perinatal decision making is scant. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to conduct a narrative review of the literature exploring fathers' preferences, perspectives, and involvement in perinatal decision making. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched PubMed, Ovid, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL databases using the terms father, spouse(s), husband, and paternal separately with the combined terms of attitude, preference, involvement, influence, informed consent, decision making, pregnancy, labor induction, genetic testing, prenatal diagnosis, amniocentesis, fetal surgery, genetic abnormalities, congenital anomalies, birth defects, perinatal, and antenatal. The search was limited to English-language studies that were published anytime and conducted between July and September 2018. RESULTS: The initial search identified 616 articles; 13 articles met criteria for inclusion. Fathers view themselves as serving distinct roles in perinatal decision making and have specific informational needs that would support their involvement in decision making. Although fathers want to support their partners and learn about fetal health, they often feel excluded from perinatal screening decisions. Mothers and fathers also have different needs, concerns, and preferences regarding key perinatal decisions that, if unresolved, can impact the couples' relationship and perinatal outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Findings provide import insights into the distinct experiences, roles, needs, and perspectives of fathers facing perinatal decision making. RELEVANCE: Advancing research and policy on fathers' involvement in perinatal decision making could lead to a paradigm shift in how maternity care is structured, how obstetric services are delivered, and how perinatal interventions are designed and implemented.

Impact of socioeconomic markers on parents' retention of pediatric oncology home care education: A pilot study.

Little is known about the extent to which parents retain the education on how to manage home medical emergencies. We sought to describe retention of pediatric oncology home care education (POHCE) in a cohort of 24 parents of newly diagnosed children with cancer and investigate sociodemographic disparities in this retention. We measured retention using a vignette-based survey instrument. The mean score was 4 (range 0-6, SD = 1.6) and parents with high school only education and those with limited cancer health literacy scored lowest (2.5 and 2.8, respectively). Future POHCE interventions can focus on parents' literacy and education levels as predictors to tailor alternative education strategies.

Patient knowledge and attitudes toward cervical cancer screening after the 2012 screening guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: To assess women's attitudes and preferences related to recent changes in cervical cancer screening guidelines. METHODS: We distributed 380 surveys in three University based and Community clinics. Study participants anonymously completed surveys, which included questions related to demographics, cervical cancer, screening practices, risk perception and attitudes towards changing practices. RESULTS: 315 women agreed to participate (83%). 60% (185/310) of participants had some college education or higher and 12% (36/305) worked in the medical field. On average, participants answered 4.1 (SD = 1.3) of the 8 knowledge questions correctly. Knowledge scores significantly increased with education level (Kruskal-Wallis test p-value < 0.001). The majority (72%, n = 228) reported that they should be screened annually, and that screening should be initiated with the onset of sexual activity (63%, n = 197). Participants that were more knowledgeable of current screening practices were more comfortable extending screening intervals (Kruskal-Wallis test p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Even among a relatively highly educated population of women, participants had limited knowledge of cervical cancer and current screening guidelines. Many participants reported discomfort with less frequent screening intervals. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: This study supports the need for improvement in cervical cancer prevention education especially with regards to the new screening guidelines.

Patient knowledge of hysterectomy and pap screening after minimally invasive hysterectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether women know their own cervical cancer screening recommendations after hysterectomy, and to evaluate patients' understanding of hysterectomy terminology and cervical cancer screening. METHODS: A 19-item questionnaire was developed and administered to 413 women who had undergone minimally invasive hysterectomy with benign pathology between January 2008 and January 2012. RESULTS: A total of 190 women (46%) participated in the survey. The majority of respondents were Caucasian (61%) and had a college education (66%). Fifty-nine percent of respondents knew that a Pap test screens for cervical cancer, and 40% knew that HPV is related to cervical cancer. Eight-four percent understood that Pap screening is recommended if a woman still has a cervix after hysterectomy. Only 67% correctly identified if their cervix had been removed during their own surgery and if they needed future cervical cancer screening per current guidelines. Caucasian race and higher income were significant predictors of hysterectomy and screening knowledge. CONCLUSION: Knowledge regarding Pap tests, HPV, and implications of a supracervical hysterectomy is lacking, even among a post-hysterectomy population. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Patient educational information is needed to improve perioperative counseling regarding the type of hysterectomy performed and indications for future cervical cancer screening.

Morbidity and mortality associated with mode of delivery for breech periviable deliveries.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to estimate the odds of morbidity and death that are associated with cesarean delivery, compared with vaginal delivery, for breech fetuses who are delivered from 23-24 6/7 weeks' gestational age. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of state-level maternal and infant hospital discharge data that were linked to vital statistics for breech deliveries that occurred from 23-24 6/7 weeks' gestation in California, Missouri, and Pennsylvania from 2000-2009 (N = 1854). Analyses were stratified by gestational age (23-23 6/7 vs 24-24 6/7 weeks' gestation). RESULTS: Cesarean delivery was performed for 46% (335 fetuses) and 77% (856 fetuses) of 23- and 24-week breech fetuses. In multivariable analyses, overall survival was greater for cesarean-born neonates (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 3.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.24-7.06; AOR, 2.91; 95% CI, 1.76-4.81, respectively). When delivered for nonemergent indications, cesarean-born survivors were more than twice as likely to experience major morbidity (intraventricular hemorrhage, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, necrotizing enterocolitis, asphyxia composite; AOR, 2.83; 95% CI, 1.37-5.84; AOR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.11-3.86 at 23 and 24 weeks' gestation, respectively). Among intubated neonates, despite a short-term survival advantage, there was no difference in survival to >6-month corrected age (AOR, 1.77; 95% CI, 0.83-3.74; AOR, 1.50; 95% CI, 0.81-2.76, respectively). There was no difference in survival for intubated 23-week neonates who were delivered by cesarean for nonemergent indications or cesarean-born neonates who weighed <500 g. CONCLUSION: Cesarean delivery increased overall survival and major morbidity for breech periviable neonates. However, among intubated neonates, despite a short-term survival advantage, there was no difference in 6-month survival. Also, cesarean delivery did not increase survival for neonates who weighed <500 g. Patients and providers should discuss explicitly the trade-offs related to neonatal death and morbidity, maternal morbidity, and implications for future pregnancies.

Shared decision-making and decision support: their role in obstetrics and gynecology.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To discuss the role for shared decision-making in obstetrics/gynecology and to review evidence on the impact of decision aids on reproductive health decision-making. RECENT FINDINGS: Among the 155 studies included in a 2014 Cochrane review of decision aids, 31 (29%) addressed reproductive health decisions. Although the majority did not show evidence of an effect on treatment choice, there was a greater uptake of mammography in selected groups of women exposed to decision aids compared with usual care; and a statistically significant reduction in the uptake of hormone replacement therapy among detailed decision aid users compared with simple decision aid users. Studies also found an effect on patient-centered outcomes of care, such as medication adherence, quality-of-life measures, and anxiety scores. In maternity care, only decision analysis tools affected final treatment choice, and patient-directed aids yielded no difference in planned mode of birth after cesarean. SUMMARY: There is untapped potential for obstetricians/gynecologists to optimize decision support for reproductive health decisions. Given the limited evidence-base guiding practice, the preference-sensitive nature of reproductive health decisions, and the increase in policy efforts and financial incentives to optimize patients' satisfaction, it is increasingly important for obstetricians/gynecologists to appreciate the role of shared decision-making and decision support in providing patient-centered reproductive healthcare.

Current practice patterns in cervical cancer screening in Indiana.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to describe current health care provider cervical cancer screening practice patterns for average-risk women in the state of Indiana in comparison to the 2012 guidelines as well as earlier guidelines. We also aim to describe what factors are associated with increased adherence to guidelines, and what factors may impede adherence. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a vignette-based survey among a convenience sample of obstetricians, gynecologists, midwives, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants attending the Indiana American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Section meeting in January 2013. RESULTS: Questionnaires were returned by 51% (112/218) of attendants. Of the 111 providers with completed surveys, 42 (38%) follow current guidelines. Of providers, 86% start screening at age 21 years. Of providers, 33% screen women aged 21-29 years every 3 years. Of providers, 33% follow recommendations for cotesting every 5 years for patients 30-65 years of age. The majority of providers follow guidelines to stop screening after a benign hysterectomy or age 65 years (75% and 51%, respectively). CONCLUSION: The majority of providers follow the 2012 guidelines for the initiation and cessation of cervical screening; however, most providers screen more frequently than currently recommended for patients between ages 21-65 years.