Literature DB >> 20825808

Patient history and physician suspicion accurately exclude pregnancy.

Max H Minnerop1, Gregory Garra, Jasmine K Chohan, Regina M Troxell, Adam J Singer.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Reliance upon patient assessment in excluding pregnancy is questionable. Physicians are encouraged to obtain pregnancy tests in all women of childbearing age. We affirmed the accuracy of women and their physicians in predicting pregnancy.
METHODS: This was a prospective, observational study performed in a suburban academic emergency department on adult women with an ordered pregnancy test. A standardized gynecologic history was obtained by trained research assistants. Subjects estimated their likelihood of pregnancy as impossible, possible, or definite. Emergency department physicians estimated the likelihood of pregnancy as high, moderate, or low. All women had either a serum or urine β-human chorionic antigen. The diagnostic characteristics of patient and physician predictions of pregnancy were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS: We enrolled 377 subjects. Median age was 29 (interquartile range, 22-37) years. Twelve percent of the women were pregnant. Women's estimates of pregnancy were as follows: impossible, 64.7%; possible, 22.5%; and definite, 12.7%. The pregnancy rates among women with estimates of impossible, possible, and definite were 0% (95% CI, 0%-1.5%), 4.7% (95% CI, 1.9%-11.5%), and 89.6% (95% CI, 77.8%-95.5%) (P < .001). Physicians' suspicions of pregnancy were high (13.7%), moderate (11.3%), and low (75.1%). The rate of pregnancy among low, moderate, and high physician suspicion groups were 0% (95% CI, 0%-1.4%), 9.5% (95% CI, 3.8%-22%), and 84.3% (95% CI, 72%-92%) (P < .001).
CONCLUSIONS: There were no pregnancies among women who estimated pregnancy as impossible or whose physicians thought that the likelihood of pregnancy was low. Routine pregnancy testing before radiological imaging and medication administration may not be required in adult women of childbearing age. Copyright Â
© 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20825808     DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2009.10.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Emerg Med        ISSN: 0735-6757            Impact factor:   2.469


  5 in total

1.  Prime time to resuscitate clinical medicine and kill diagnostic greed?

Authors:  C Rajasoorya
Journal:  Singapore Med J       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 1.858

2.  A qualitative exploration of women's experiences discovering pregnancies in the emergency department.

Authors:  Sarah C M Roberts; Erin Wingo; Katrina Kimport
Journal:  Contracept X       Date:  2020-04-23

3.  Ruling out early trimester pregnancy when implementing community-based deworming programs.

Authors:  Kariane St-Denis; Brittany Blouin; Elham Rahme; Martin Casapia; Antonio Montresor; Denise Mupfasoni; Pamela Sabina Mbabazi; Theresa W Gyorkos
Journal:  PLoS Negl Trop Dis       Date:  2020-01-30

4.  False negative point-of-care urine pregnancy tests in an urban academic emergency department: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Sarah Kleinschmidt; Julianne N Dugas; Kerrie P Nelson; James A Feldman
Journal:  J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open       Date:  2021-05-01

5.  Is routine pregnancy test necessary in women of reproductive age admitted to the emergency department?

Authors:  Ozlem Köksal; Fatma Ozdemir; Erol Armağan; Nuran Oner; Pınar Çinar Sert; Deniz Sigirli
Journal:  World J Emerg Med       Date:  2013
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.