Facilitating positive birth experience when preferences are not met: A qualitative analysis.

INTRODUCTION: High-quality health systems rely on care that centers on patient preferences. Realization of patient preferences can improve the birth experience. However, in the dynamic setting of birth, birth preferences can diverge from what is medically indicated. Through studying women and birthing peoples' experiences of unplanned labor procedures, we aimed to identify ways in which practitioners can support women and birthing people through unexpected or unwanted aspects of their delivery. Specifically, we focused on labor induction. METHODS: In one large US academic center, women and birthing people participated in prenatal and postpartum surveys regarding their desires, expectations, and experiences of labor induction. From April to November 2021, participants were eligible if they showed discordance between having labor induction and whether it was initially wanted or expected. Interviews focused on attitudes toward birth preferences and outcomes, with attention to discordances. We analyzed interviews through a modified grounded theory approach. RESULTS: Of 22 participants, our sample was predominantly white (91%). Participants in this sample reported discordance between wanting and experiencing (73%) and/or expecting and experiencing (54%) an induction. We identified two themes: "Discordance without mitigation is perceived as a negative experience" and "Practitioner interaction can buffer against negative experience" which includes three ways in which participants prefer support in instances of discordance: preparation, communication, and care and comfort. These methods of support foster patient autonomy and can lead to positive patient experiences. CONCLUSIONS: While medical systems should work to support patient preferences, our results suggest that patients can still have positive birth experiences, even when preferences are not fulfilled. Early practitioner preparation, positive communication, and responsive care and comfort may help to improve patient birth experience when challenges arise.

Genital tuberculosis screening at an academic fertility center in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Infertility is a common presentation of female genital tuberculosis in endemic areas. Female genital tuberculosis-related maternal and neonatal complications have increased in recent years after assisted reproductive technology treatments. Despite rising emigration rates to the United States, guidelines to identify those with latent tuberculosis or female genital tuberculosis in fertility centers do not exist. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to characterize the prevalence of female genital tuberculosis in infertile patients at our academic fertility center. STUDY DESIGN: This is a prospective cohort study. All patients presenting for infertility evaluation between January 2014 and January 2017 were assessed for risk factors for latent tuberculosis. Patients at risk for latent tuberculosis underwent screening using QuantiFERON-TB Gold serum assay. QuantiFERON-TB Gold-positive patients underwent further testing for female genital tuberculosis consisting of endometrial biopsy with histopathologic examination by a clinical pathologist, polymerase chain reaction for tuberculosis, and culture for acid-fast Mycobacterium tuberculosis. RESULTS: Twenty-five of 323 infertility patients (7.7%) screened for latent tuberculosis had positive QuantiFERON-TB Gold results. A greater number of patients with a positive test result for QuantiFERON-TB Gold were foreign born than those with a negative test result for QuantiFERON-TB Gold (92% vs 29%; P<.001). Of note, the QuantiFERON-TB Gold-positive population had a higher incidence of both recurrent pregnancy loss (28% vs 7%; P=.003) and Asherman syndrome (8% vs 0.3%; P<.001). Among those with a positive test result for QuantiFERON-TB Gold, chest x-ray was abnormal in only 2 patients (8.0%). Endometrium evaluation revealed abnormalities in 2 patients (8.0%), in whom chest x-ray was normal, with 1 showing evidence of female genital tuberculosis. This was indicated by histology consistent with chronic granulomatous endometritis and positive endometrial testing for tuberculosis by polymerase chain reaction, acid-fast bacilli smear, and culture for Mycobacterium tuberculosis. CONCLUSION: Although the prevalence of female genital tuberculosis in infertile women in the United States seems to be low, this study indicates that it can be underdiagnosed without utilization of multiple diagnostic modalities including endometrial sampling. Given the potential for serious maternal and neonatal morbidity in affected patients utilizing assisted reproductive technology, we propose that all at-risk women seeking infertility care in the United States be screened for latent tuberculosis. In patients who screen positive, endometrial biopsy should be obtained for evaluation by histology, polymerase chain reaction, and culture for Mycobacterium tuberculosis to rule out female genital tuberculosis before infertility treatments are initiated.