Online Information About Periviable Birth: Quality Assessment.

BACKGROUND: Over 20,000 parents in the United States face the challenge of participating in decisions about whether to use life support for their infants born on the cusp of viability every year. Clinicians must help families grasp complex medical information about their baby's immediate prognosis as well as the risk for significant long-term morbidity. Patients faced with this decision want supplemental information and frequently seek medical information on the Internet. Empirical evidence about the quality of websites is lacking. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the quality of online information available about periviable birth and treatment options for infants born at the cusp of viability. METHODS: We read a counseling script to 20 pregnant participants that included information typically provided by perinatal and neonatal providers when periviable birth is imminent. The women were then asked to list terms they would use to search the Internet if they wanted additional information. Using these search terms, two reviewers evaluated the content of websites obtained via a Google search. We used two metrics to assess the quality of websites. The first was the DISCERN instrument, a validated questionnaire designed to assess the quality of patient-targeted health information for treatment choices. The second metric was the Essential Content Tool (ECT), a tool designed to address key components of counseling around periviable birth as outlined by professional organizations. DISCERN scores were classified as low quality if scores were 2, fair quality if scores were 3, and high quality if scores were 4 or higher. Scores of 6 or higher on the ECT were considered high quality. Interreviewer agreement was assessed by calculated kappa statistic. RESULTS: A total of 97 websites were reviewed. Over half (57/97, 59%) were for-profit sites, news stories, or personal blogs; 28% (27/97) were government or medical sites; and 13% (13/97) were nonprofit or advocacy sites. The majority of sites scored poorly in DISCERN questions designed to assess the reliability of information presented as well as data regarding treatment choices. Only 7% (7/97) of the websites were high quality as defined by the DISCERN tool. The majority of sites did not address the essential content defined by the ECT. Importantly, only 18% of websites (17/97) indicated that there are often a number of reasonable approaches to newborn care when faced with periviable birth. Agreement was strong, with kappa ranging from .72 to .91. CONCLUSIONS: Most information about periviable birth found on the Internet using common search strategies is of low quality. News stories highlighting positive outcomes are disproportionately represented. Few websites discuss comfort care or how treatment decisions impact quality of life.

Diagnostic accuracy of fundal height and handheld ultrasound-measured abdominal circumference to screen for fetal growth abnormalities.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare fundal height and handheld ultrasound-measured fetal abdominal circumference (HHAC) for the prediction of fetal growth restriction (FGR) or large for gestational age. STUDY DESIGN: This was a diagnostic accuracy study in nonanomalous singleton pregnancies between 24 and 40 weeks' gestation. Patients underwent HHAC and fundal height measurement prior to formal growth ultrasound. FGR was defined as estimated fetal weight less than 10%, whereas large for gestational age was defined as estimated fetal weight greater than 90%. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated and compared using methods described elsewhere. RESULTS: There were 251 patients included in this study. HHAC had superior sensitivity and specificity for the detection of FGR (sensitivity, 100% vs 42.86%) and (specificity, 92.62% vs 85.24%). HHAC had higher specificity but lower sensitivity when screening for LGA (specificity, 85.66% vs 66.39%) and (sensitivity, 57.14% vs 71.43%). CONCLUSION: HHAC could prove to be a valuable screening tool in the detection of FGR. Further studies are needed in a larger population.

Using antimicrobial solution for irrigation in appendicitis to lower surgical site infection rates.

BACKGROUND: The use of antimicrobial solutions for irrigation in appendicitis is controversial. Numerous antiseptic and antibiotic solutions have been suggested for use as an intraoperative irrigant. We sought to determine whether there was a difference in postoperative surgical site infections (SSIs) comparing normal saline (.9%), antiseptic solution (Dakin's, .25%), and an antibiotic solution (imipenem 1 mg/mL). METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of adult appendectomies from January 1997 through November 2007 at a single institution The data were evaluated by multivariate logistic regression analysis and chi-square test. The incidences of postoperative overall SSI, wound infection, and abdominal abscess were compared. RESULTS: A total of 1,063 cases were identified. Saline (n = 661) had an SSI rate of 9.8% (65/661), a wound infection rate of 7.3% (48/661), and an abdominal abscess rate of 4.2% (28/661). Dakin's (n = 208) had an SSI rate of 20.7% (43/208), a wound infection rate of 15.9% (33/208), and an abdominal abscess rate of 9.1% (19/208). Imipenem (n = 194) irrigation had an SSI rate of .5% (1/194), a wound infection rate of .5% (1/194), and an abdominal abscess rate of .5% (1/194). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that abdominal irrigation with an antibiotic solution (imipenem 1 mg/mL) is superior to both normal saline and Dakin's solution.