OBJECTIVE: To assess the activity of a prepregnancy counselling clinic in terms of investigations, counselling, treatment and subsequent pregnancy outcome. DESIGN: Review of 1,075 couples attending over a nine year period. SETTING: University Hospital offering a tertiary referral service for fetal medicine. SUBJECTS: Couples referred to the clinic from a variety of sources. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Categories of referral, value of diagnostic tests, and subsequent pregnancy outcome. RESULTS: The main categories of referral were: previous miscarriage (44.4%); previous fetal abnormality (19.6%); chronic maternal disease (22.3%); and others (13.7%). Routine investigations produced a low yield of abnormality (1%), in contrast to investigations selected for specific reasons (12%). Subsequent pregnancy outcome, which was unaltered in either the previous miscarriage or fetal abnormality groups, did improve in the chronic maternal disease group. CONCLUSIONS: This study does not prove the value of prepregnancy counselling. However, it does illustrate the importance of making an accurate assessment of previous problems and current health as a means of determining both maternal and fetal risks in a subsequent pregnancy, a process which seems to lead to an improved outcome within selected groups. The importance of continuity of care in all couples, especially when there has been a previous adverse pregnancy outcome is emphasized.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the activity of a prepregnancy counselling clinic in terms of investigations, counselling, treatment and subsequent pregnancy outcome. DESIGN: Review of 1,075 couples attending over a nine year period. SETTING: University Hospital offering a tertiary referral service for fetal medicine. SUBJECTS: Couples referred to the clinic from a variety of sources. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Categories of referral, value of diagnostic tests, and subsequent pregnancy outcome. RESULTS: The main categories of referral were: previous miscarriage (44.4%); previous fetal abnormality (19.6%); chronic maternal disease (22.3%); and others (13.7%). Routine investigations produced a low yield of abnormality (1%), in contrast to investigations selected for specific reasons (12%). Subsequent pregnancy outcome, which was unaltered in either the previous miscarriage or fetal abnormality groups, did improve in the chronic maternal disease group. CONCLUSIONS: This study does not prove the value of prepregnancy counselling. However, it does illustrate the importance of making an accurate assessment of previous problems and current health as a means of determining both maternal and fetal risks in a subsequent pregnancy, a process which seems to lead to an improved outcome within selected groups. The importance of continuity of care in all couples, especially when there has been a previous adverse pregnancy outcome is emphasized.