Hannah Chiu1, Donna Steele2, Chryssa McAlister1, Wai-Ching Lam3. 1. Department of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Toronto; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, St. Michael's Hospital. 3. Department of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences; Department of Ophthalmology, University Health Network, Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, Ont.. Electronic address: waiching.lam@utoronto.ca.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: High-risk pathologies for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) in otherwise healthy pregnant females are not contraindications for spontaneous vaginal delivery. However, 74% of European obstetrician-gynecologist (OBGYN) respondents in 2008 recommended operative delivery for females at risk for RRD. This discrepancy is likely due to an older study suggesting a causal relation between Valsalva-like manoeuvres and RRD. The purpose of this study is to determine current delivery recommendations for healthy pregnant females with high-risk pathologies for RRD among Canadian ophthalmologists and OBGYNs. METHODS: Anonymous prospective cross-sectional survey sent via electronic link in 2013. χ(2) test of proportions was used to compare delivery recommendations between the 2 specialties. Multinomial logistic regression was used to identify predictors for recommendations. RESULTS: A total of 356 participants responded including 92 ophthalmologists and 27 trainees, and 185 OBGYNs and 52 trainees. For healthy pregnant females with previously treated retinal hole/tear or treated RRD, significantly more OBGYNs recommended cesarean section and significantly more ophthalmologists recommended spontaneous vaginal delivery. Length of practice and type of practice setting were significant predictors among obstetricians in their delivery recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to include obstetricians, ophthalmologists, and their trainees in a survey of the recommended mode of delivery for pregnant females with risk factors of RRD. Our results suggest that obstetricians concerned about potential RRD in pregnant patients may be unnecessarily recommending operative management. Educational sessions on the risk for RRD with spontaneous vaginal delivery may reconcile the current differences in recommendations between ophthalmologists and obstetricians.
OBJECTIVE: High-risk pathologies for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) in otherwise healthy pregnant females are not contraindications for spontaneous vaginal delivery. However, 74% of European obstetrician-gynecologist (OBGYN) respondents in 2008 recommended operative delivery for females at risk for RRD. This discrepancy is likely due to an older study suggesting a causal relation between Valsalva-like manoeuvres and RRD. The purpose of this study is to determine current delivery recommendations for healthy pregnant females with high-risk pathologies for RRD among Canadian ophthalmologists and OBGYNs. METHODS: Anonymous prospective cross-sectional survey sent via electronic link in 2013. χ(2) test of proportions was used to compare delivery recommendations between the 2 specialties. Multinomial logistic regression was used to identify predictors for recommendations. RESULTS: A total of 356 participants responded including 92 ophthalmologists and 27 trainees, and 185 OBGYNs and 52 trainees. For healthy pregnant females with previously treated retinal hole/tear or treated RRD, significantly more OBGYNs recommended cesarean section and significantly more ophthalmologists recommended spontaneous vaginal delivery. Length of practice and type of practice setting were significant predictors among obstetricians in their delivery recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to include obstetricians, ophthalmologists, and their trainees in a survey of the recommended mode of delivery for pregnant females with risk factors of RRD. Our results suggest that obstetricians concerned about potential RRD in pregnant patients may be unnecessarily recommending operative management. Educational sessions on the risk for RRD with spontaneous vaginal delivery may reconcile the current differences in recommendations between ophthalmologists and obstetricians.