Medical termination of pregnancy for fetal anomaly at or beyond 20 weeks' gestation-What are the maternal risks?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the common and severe maternal morbidities associated with medical termination of pregnancy (MTOP) for fetal anomaly ≥20 weeks' gestation. METHODS: A 10-year retrospective cohort study (January 2010-December 2019) analyzing 407 consecutive singleton pregnancies MTOP for fetal anomaly ≥20 weeks' gestation, at a quaternary maternity centre in Australia (Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne). RESULTS: The cohort comprised of 191 primiparous and 216 multiparous women, of whom 75 (34.7%) had at least one prior Cesarean; 13 women had a low-lying placenta or placenta praevia. The average gestation was 23 weeks (interquartile range 22-26 weeks). A spontaneous unassisted vaginal delivery was achieved by the majority (n = 403, 99.0%). The most common maternal morbidities were transferred to the theater for manual removal of retained placental tissue (n = 65, 16.0%) and postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) (n = 45, 11.1%). Severe maternal morbidity occurred in six cases (1.3%) and included amniotic fluid embolism, cardiac arrest, major obstetric haemorrhage, uterine rupture and intensive care unit admission. There were no maternal deaths. CONCLUSIONS: The most common complications of MTOP for fetal anomaly ≥20 weeks' gestation were manual removal of placenta and PPH. Severe maternal morbidity affected 1 in 81 women.

Moderate to late preterm intrauterine growth restriction: A restrospective, observational study of the indications for delivery and outcomes in an Australian perinatal centre.

BACKGROUND: The management of preterm intrauterine growth restriction is limited to fetal surveillance and timely delivery. Despite the existence of evidence-based guidelines, uncertainty regarding the optimal timing of delivery is common, and management remains individualised for each patient. AIMS: To provide recent Australian data on the indications for delivery of moderate to late preterm growth restricted infants and the outcomes of these deliveries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective study of singleton live births delivered between 32 + 0 and 36 + 6 weeks gestation over a three-year period (2012-2014) at a Melbourne Metropolitan Hospital. 'Small for gestational age' (birthweight < 10th centile for gestation) identified intrauterine growth restricted infants. Indications for iatrogenic delivery were broadly categorised into maternal, fetal or pregnancy related. Obstetric and neonatal outcome variables were compared to other preterm infants using logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 146 (18.6%) small for gestational age infants born during the study period, 103 were iatrogenic deliveries, most commonly due to fetal indications (53.4%). Small for gestational age infants had higher odds of hypoglycaemia (adjusted odds ratio = 1.87, 95% CI: 1.23-2.84, P = 0.003) and jaundice (1.52, 1.01-2.28, P = 0.043) than their appropriately grown counterparts; however, there was no increase in the risk of serious morbidity or mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, iatrogenic preterm delivery of small for gestational age infants between 32 + 0 and 36 + 6 weeks gestation was most commonly due to fetal indications and did not increase the risk of serious, short-term neonatal outcomes compared to their appropriately grown counterparts.

The recovery model in chronic mental health: A community-based investigation of social identity processes.

The recovery model has been enormously influential in shaping mental health services globally over the last two decades. However, empirical research on its outcomes and psychological mechanisms is sparse. This community-based case study utilised both semi-structured qualitative interviews and quantitative survey methods to investigate perceptions of recovery, identity, and wellbeing among people with chronic and severe mental illness attending recovery-oriented support groups. Consistent with a social identity approach and the recovery model, to the extent that people identified as "in recovery", they reported better recovery outcomes (e.g., sense of purpose) and reduced psychological distress. Furthermore, recovery identity more strongly predicted recovery outcomes than it did psychological distress. Both the quantitative and qualitative data pointed to collective efficacy (i.e., group-based empowerment) as a key mediator of these outcomes. These findings are consistent with the recovery model and speak to the utility of a social identity approach for conceptualizing its efficacy. However, these findings also speak to the need for further evaluation of how and when recovery-oriented mental health services achieve their intended goal of improving quality of life for people with chronic and severe mental illness.

Our Sunshine place: A collective narrative and reflection on the experiences of a mental health crisis leading to an admission to a psychiatric inpatient unit.

Acute mental health inpatient units are complex environments where tensions between clinical and personal recovery can be amplified. The focus for mental health staff is often centred on providing clinical care, whereas from the patient perspective, the admission can represent a profound existential crisis. There are very few user-led accounts of their experiences of psychiatric inpatient unit. This project was developed in the traditions of Analytic Auto-Ethnography, a research methodology which provides a systematic process to reflect on our own experience while still producing trustworthy findings. Through this process, a collective narrative and critical reflection of a group of over 20 individuals with experiences of either providing or receiving care in an acute psychiatric inpatient unit was developed. The narrative developed shows that for some the hospital admission was a time of healing; for others, the inpatient unit represented an alien and unsafe environment, which accentuated the strangeness of the experiences of mental ill health. Common themes among the group were that of an overarching need to make sense of what happened leading up to the admissions and to come to terms with the potential impact of the illness on identity and future. This journey can be best described as a process of healing and moving towards 'wholeness'. Safety, connection, autonomy and control were identified as factors which either facilitated or hindered the process of successfully integrating the various experiences.