Questionnaire-based vs universal PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 in women admitted for delivery.

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that women admitted for delivery should have universal PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2. Yet, the considerable difference in the incidence of COVID-19 between different geographic regions may affect screening strategies. Therefore, we aimed to compare questionnaire-based testing versus universal PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 in women admitted for delivery. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of women admitted for delivery at a single center during a four-week period (April 22-May 25, 2020). All women completed a questionnaire about COVID-19 signs, symptoms, or risk factors, and a nasopharyngeal swab for PCR for SARS-CoV-2. Women who were flagged as suspected COVID-19 by the questionnaire (questionnaire-positive) were compared with women who were not flagged by the questionnaire (questionnaire-negative). RESULTS: Overall, 446 women were eligible for analysis, of which 54 (12.1%) were questionnaire-positive. PCR swab detected SARS-CoV-2 in four (0.9%) women: 3 of 392 (0.8%) in the questionnaire-negative group, and 1 of 54 (1.9%) in the questionnaire-positive group (P = .43), yielding a number needed to screen of 92 (95% CI 62-177). In 96% of the cases, the PCR results were obtained only in the postpartum period. No positive PCR results were obtained from neonatal testing for SARS-CoV-2. The sensitivity of the questionnaire was 75.0%, and the negative predictive value was 99.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Although the rate of positive PCR results was not significantly different between the groups, the number needed to screen is considerably high. The use of questionnaire-based PCR testing in areas with low incidence of COVID-19 allows for a reasonable allocation of resources and is easy to implement.

Factors influencing the difficulty of laparoscopic myomectomy: the development of a surgical rating tool.

Objective To obtain expert consensus on the patient and fibroid characteristics that affect the complexity of laparoscopic myomectomy (LM) and to use these factors to create a grading tool for objective evaluation of LM procedures. Study design Modified Delphi Methodology Study (Canadian Task Force III). Setting included a series of online surveys via SurveyMonkey (SurveyMonkey Inc., San Mateo, California, USA). Participants were Canadian minimally invasive gynecologic surgeons (MIGS) who perform LM. A list consisting of patient, uterine and procedural characteristics was disseminated to Canadian MIGS. Opportunity to include additional factors was provided. Consensus was predefined as Cronbach's α of ≥0.80. A second Delphi survey was then done to assign weight value for each item in the grading tool. Results Twenty-seven surgeons from across Canada participated. Most (23/27, 85%) were MIGS fellowship trained, and performed more than 6 LM per year (18/27, 66.7%). Consensus was achieved in the first round of the survey (Cronbach's α = 0.93). Sixteen of 27 factors met the criteria for inclusion (>80% respondents agreed or strongly agreed) and were included in the final rating tool. Factors that met the criteria for inclusion were grouped as patient factors (including body mass index), uterine factors (including number of fibroids, size of largest fibroid), and surgical factors (including ease of developing the cleavage plane). Conclusions Using the Delphi methodology to obtain expert consensus on the factors influencing the difficulty of LM, we have developed an objective grading tool to evaluate the degree of technical complexity of LM.

Episiotomy Technique and Management of Anal Sphincter Tears-A Survey of Clinical Practice and Education.

OBJECTIVE: To ascertain current techniques of episiotomy used by obstetrics and gynaecology faculty members and residents in an academic department and to determine the current management strategies for third and fourth degree tears. METHOD: A 14-question anonymous online survey was circulated to all faculty members and residents in the University of Toronto Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology between October 2015 and March 2016. Results were analyzed descriptively or with Fisher exact test. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 65.5% (169/258) among 108 faculty members and 61 residents. A history of clinical teaching regarding episiotomy was reported by 87% of faculty members and 75.4% of residents. Right mediolateral episiotomy was the most frequently used method among faculty members (88.0%) and residents (95.1%). The majority of respondents indicated that they would use an end-to-end technique for repair in the labour and delivery room under regional anaesthesia. Prophylactic antibiotics were never prescribed by 18.5% of faculty members and 13.1% of residents for third or fourth degree tears. In analysis by type of training, respondents who had taken a workshop or formal class were significantly more likely to prescribe physiotherapy postpartum (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: The most common reported method of learning episiotomy was clinical experience. A substantial number of responses differed from current SOGC guidelines for episiotomy technique and repair and management of anal sphincter injury. We propose developing a workshop and/or simulation-based method of instruction for episiotomy technique and repair.