Literature DB >> 14618665

Transvaginal ultrasound in pregnancy: its acceptability to women and maternal psychological morbidity.

S Clement1, B Candy, V Heath, M To, K H Nicolaides.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess the acceptability to women of antenatal transvaginal ultrasound scans; to compare the characteristics of women who accept the offer of a transvaginal scan with those who decline; to establish the prevalence of any psychological morbidity associated with the scan.
METHODS: The study was a cross-sectional questionnaire survey. Women were recruited from two hospitals in South London. The sample consisted of 755 pregnant women who had a transvaginal scan at 23 weeks' gestation to assess the risk of preterm delivery and 167 women who were offered the transvaginal scan but declined. Women completed a questionnaire at home. Those who reported finding the scan a difficult experience were sent a questionnaire 4 weeks post-scan to assess its longer term impact. The main outcomes were acceptability (assessed by individual questionnaire items); anxiety before and during the scan (Spielberger State-trait Anxiety Inventory); pain during the scan (Present Pain Intensity Scale of the McGill Pain Questionnaire); psychological trauma (Impact of Event Scale).
RESULTS: Over half (55.2%) of women accepted the offer of a transvaginal scan, according to hospital records. The majority of study participants who had transvaginal ultrasound reported finding the experience acceptable. Women experienced some anxiety before and during the scan and over a third experienced some (usually mild) pain during the procedure. Twelve women (1.6%) reported clinically significant levels of psychological trauma in relation to the scan.
CONCLUSIONS: Antenatal transvaginal ultrasound for assessing the risk of preterm delivery is an acceptable procedure for the majority of women. A significant minority decline the scan. The procedure has some psychological sequelae for some women. Copyright 2003 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14618665     DOI: 10.1002/uog.893

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0960-7692            Impact factor:   7.299


  10 in total

1.  Management of pregnancies with cervical shortening: a very short cervix is a very big problem.

Authors:  Hee Joong Lee; Tae Chul Park; Errol R Norwitz
Journal:  Rev Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2009

2.  Reasons Why Pregnant Women Participate in Ultrasound Research Involving Transvaginal Scans.

Authors:  Barbara T Meagher; Marissa R Campos; Patrick Thornton; Carrie Klima; Tara A Peters; Josefin Hallberg; Emma Ulfhager; William D O'Brien; Barbara L McFarlin
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2020-02-19       Impact factor: 2.153

3.  Effects of simulation for gynaecological ultrasound scan training: a systematic review.

Authors:  Natalie Jane Woodhead; Ayesha Mahmud; Justin Clark
Journal:  BMJ Simul Technol Enhanc Learn       Date:  2020-11-01

Review 4.  Dangers in the dark: Calling for a safer practice of transvaginal ultrasonography.

Authors:  Kelly Collins; Tina Hamlyn; George Bruxner; Alka Kothari
Journal:  Australas J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2020-12-05

5.  Transvaginal ultrasonography: a survey of the acceptability and its predictors among a native African women population.

Authors:  Omolola M Atalabi; Imran O Morhason-Bello; Ademola J Adekanmi; Anthony O Marinho; Babatunde O Adedokun; Adegoke O Kalejaiye; Kayode Sogo; Sikiru A Gbadamosi
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2011-12-29

Review 6.  Additional effects of the cervical length measurement in women with preterm contractions: a systematic review.

Authors:  Jolande Y Vis; Rosanna A Kuin; William A Grobman; Ben Willem J Mol; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Brent C Opmeer
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2011-04-12       Impact factor: 2.344

7.  Utility of follow-up cervical length screening in low-risk women with a cervical length of 26 to 29 mm.

Authors:  Rupsa C Boelig; Varsha Kripalu; Sarah L Chen; Yuri Cruz; Amanda Roman; Vincenzo Berghella
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2021-02-27       Impact factor: 10.693

Review 8.  Cervical length for predicting preterm birth and a comparison of ultrasonic measurement techniques.

Authors:  Sandra O'Hara; Marilyn Zelesco; Zhonghua Sun
Journal:  Australas J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2015-12-31

9.  Can Transabdominal Scan Predict a Short Cervix by Transvaginal Scan?

Authors:  Jayaraman Mavila Nambiar; Muralidhar Vaman Pai; Arevidya Reddy; Pratap Kumar
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Int       Date:  2017-04-09

10.  Vaginal progesterone in risk reduction of preterm birth in women with short cervix in the midtrimester of pregnancy.

Authors:  Meena Khandelwal
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2012-09-14
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.