Literature DB >> 16435312

Why women want prenatal ultrasound in normal pregnancy.

C Gudex1, B L Nielsen, M Madsen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To investigate women's reasons for requesting prenatal ultrasound in the absence of clinical indications.
METHODS: A postal questionnaire was completed by 370 pregnant women with no apparent obstetric risk factors, who had expressed a desire to have ultrasound scanning in their current pregnancy. The women were asked to indicate, from a list of 12 items, their three most important reasons for wanting scanning. Ninety per cent of the women were in the first trimester of pregnancy, and 10% in the second trimester.
RESULTS: The items most frequently identified as important reasons for ultrasound were to check for fetal abnormalities (60% of women), to see that all was normal (55%) and for own reassurance (44%). Lower income was related to wanting to see the baby (P = 0.028) and wanting an ultrasound picture (P = 0.017); higher income was related to checking that all was normal (P = 0.003) and for own reassurance (P = 0.015). Women in their first pregnancy were more likely to want themselves and the father to see the baby (P = 0.001); women who had given birth previously were more likely to want reassurance (P = 0.002), as were women with a previous miscarriage or induced abortion. Women who believed that the presence of fetal trisomy justifies abortion or who would vote for free abortion were more likely to want to know about abnormalities (P < 0.001 and P < 0.004, respectively). Women in the second trimester were more likely to want to check for abnormalities (P = 0.041) and appropriate fetal growth (P = 0.047) than those in the first trimester.
CONCLUSIONS: It would appear that women in normal pregnancy have specific reasons for wanting prenatal ultrasound that are influenced by sociodemographic, obstetric and attitudinal factors. Copyright (c) 2005 ISUOG.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16435312     DOI: 10.1002/uog.2646

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


  10 in total

1.  Proliferation of prenatal ultrasonography.

Authors:  John J You; David A Alter; Therese A Stukel; Sarah D McDonald; Andreas Laupacis; Ying Liu; Joel G Ray
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2010-01-04       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Physical model from 3D ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging scan data reconstruction of lumbosacral myelomeningocele in a fetus with Chiari II malformation.

Authors:  Heron Werner; Jorge Lopes; Gabriele Tonni; Edward Araujo Júnior
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2015-02-17       Impact factor: 1.475

3.  Severity of ASD symptoms and their correlation with the presence of copy number variations and exposure to first trimester ultrasound.

Authors:  Sara Jane Webb; Michelle M Garrison; Raphael Bernier; Abbi M McClintic; Bryan H King; Pierre D Mourad
Journal:  Autism Res       Date:  2016-09-01       Impact factor: 5.216

4.  The Ghanaian woman's experience and perception of ultrasound use in antenatal care.

Authors:  Y B Mensah; K Nkyekyer; K Mensah
Journal:  Ghana Med J       Date:  2014-03

5.  Preferences for a third-trimester ultrasound scan in a low-risk obstetric population: a discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Fiona A Lynn; Grainne E Crealey; Fiona A Alderdice; James C McElnay
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2013-03-26       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 6.  High feedback versus low feedback of prenatal ultrasound for reducing maternal anxiety and improving maternal health behaviour in pregnancy.

Authors:  Ashraf F Nabhan; Nasreen Aflaifel
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-08-04

7.  Desire for prenatal gender disclosure among primigravidae in Enugu, Nigeria.

Authors:  Tochukwu C Okeke; Jamike O Enwereji; Onyemaechi S Okoro; Eric S Iferikigwe; Lawrence C Ikeako; Cyril C Ezenyeaku; Charles O Adiri
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2015-03-11       Impact factor: 2.711

8.  When fetal hydronephrosis is suspected antenatally--a qualitative study.

Authors:  Marie Oscarsson; Tomas Gottvall; Katarina Swahnberg
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2015-12-22       Impact factor: 3.007

9.  Clients' reasons for prenatal ultrasonography in Ibadan, South West of Nigeria.

Authors:  Christopher A Enakpene; Imran O Morhason-Bello; Anthony O Marinho; Babatunde O Adedokun; Adegoke O Kalejaiye; Kayode Sogo; Sikiru A Gbadamosi; Babatunde S Awoyinka; Obehi O Enabor
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2009-05-09       Impact factor: 2.809

10.  Reasons for disclosure of gender to pregnant women during prenatal ultrasonography.

Authors:  Shazia Shukar-Ud-Din; Fareeha Ubaid; Erum Shahani; Farah Saleh
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2013-12-13
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.