Intrapartum Ultrasound and Mother Acceptance: A Study with Informed Consent and Questionnaire

Overview

Journal Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X

Specialty Gynecology & Obstetrics

Date 2023 Oct 25

PMID 37876768

Authors

Antonio Malvasi

Gianluca Raffaello Damiani

Edoardo DI Naro

Amerigo Vitagliano

Miriam Dellino

Reuven Achiron

Kosmas Ioannis

Antonella Vimercati

Maria Gaetani

Ettore Cicinelli

Marina Vinciguerra

Ilaria Ricci

Andrea Tinelli

Giorgio Maria Baldini

Erica Silvestris

Giuseppe Trojano

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: Intrapartum ultrasound (IU) is used in the delivery ward; even if IU monitors the labouring women, it could be perceived as a discomfort and even as an" obstetric violence", because it is a young technique, not often well "accepted". A group of clinicians aimed at obtain an informed consent from patients, prior to perform a translabial ultrasound (TU). The aim of this study was to evaluate the acceptance of both translabial and transabdominal IU.

Methods: In this study, performed at the University Hospital of Bari (Unit of Obstetrics and Gynecology), were enrolled 103 patients in the first or second stage of labor in singleton cephalic presentation. A statistical frequency and an association analysis were performed. As a significant result, we consider the peace of mind/satisfaction and the" obstetric violence". IU was performed both transabdominal and translabial to determine the presentation, head positions, angle of progression and head perineum distance. During the first and second stage of labor, the ASIUG questionnaires (Apulia study intrapartum ultrasonography group) were administered.

Results: 74 (71, 84%) patients underwent IU and 29 had a vaginal examination (28, 15%). Significant less "violence" has been experienced with a IU (73 out 74/98, 65%) and only one person (1 /1, 35%) recorded that. On the contrary, 10 patients (10/29) perceived that "violence" (34, 48%) while 19 (65, 52%) did not respond on a similar way, after a vaginal examination (VE). More patients felt satisfaction (71 out 74/95, 95%) with the use of IU and only 3 (3/4, 05%) felt unease. A different picture was evident in the vaginal examination group. Only 17 patients (17 out 29/58, 62%) felt comfort while 12 (41, 38%) felt unease.

Conclusions: In our study, IU use is well accepted by most of patients, because it could reassure women about their fetal condition. Moreover, they can see the fetus on the screen, while the obstetrician is performing the US and this is important for a visual feedback, in comparison with the classical VE.

Citing Articles

AIDA (Artificial Intelligence Dystocia Algorithm) in Prolonged Dystocic Labor: Focus on Asynclitism Degree.

Malvasi A, Malgieri L, Cicinelli E, Vimercati A, Achiron R, Sparic R J Imaging. 2024; 10(8).

PMID: 39194983 PMC: 11355300. DOI: 10.3390/jimaging10080194.

References

Van Adrichem A, Faes E, Kinget K, Jacquemyn Y . Intrapartum ultrasound: viewpoint of midwives and parturient women and reproducibility. Int J Womens Health. 2018; 10:251-256. PMC: 5995279. DOI: 10.2147/IJWH.S155865. View

Tutschek B, Braun T, Chantraine F, Henrich W . Quantification of fetal head direction and descent. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 41(1):99-100. DOI: 10.1002/uog.12351. View

Goli S, Ganguly D, Chakravorty S, Siddiqui M, Ram H, Rammohan A . Labour room violence in Uttar Pradesh, India: evidence from longitudinal study of pregnancy and childbirth. BMJ Open. 2019; 9(7):e028688. PMC: 6609138. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028688. View

Gilboa Y, Perlman S . Intrapartum ultrasound for the management of the active pushing phase. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2021; 3(6S):100422. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2021.100422. View

Rizzo G, Aloisio F, Bacigalupi A, Mappa I, Slodki M, Makatsarya A . Women's compliance with ultrasound in labor: a prospective observational study. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2019; 34(9):1454-1458. DOI: 10.1080/14767058.2019.1638903. View

Gurol-Urganci I, Waite L, Webster K, Jardine J, Carroll F, Dunn G . Obstetric interventions and pregnancy outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic in England: A nationwide cohort study. PLoS Med. 2022; 19(1):e1003884. PMC: 8803187. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003884. View

Gilboa Y, Frenkel T, Schlesinger Y, Rousseau S, Hamiel D, Achiron R . Visual biofeedback using transperineal ultrasound in second stage of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 52(1):91-96. DOI: 10.1002/uog.18962. View

Zaami S, Zupi E, Lazzeri L, Centini G, Stark M, Malvasi A . Episiotomy: a medicolegal vicious cycle. Panminerva Med. 2020; 63(2):224-231. DOI: 10.23736/S0031-0808.20.03946-4. View

Gimovsky A . Defining arrest in the first and second stages of labor. Minerva Obstet Gynecol. 2020; 73(1):6-18. DOI: 10.23736/S2724-606X.20.04644-4. View

10.

Vimercati A, Dellino M, Suma C, Damiani G, Malvasi A, Cazzato G . Spontaneous Uterine Rupture and Adenomyosis, a Rare but Possible Correlation: Case Report and Literature Review. Diagnostics (Basel). 2022; 12(7). PMC: 9317678. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12071574. View

11.

De Jong-Pleij E, Ribbert L, Pistorius L, Tromp E, Mulder E, Bilardo C . Three-dimensional ultrasound and maternal bonding, a third trimester study and a review. Prenat Diagn. 2012; 33(1):81-8. DOI: 10.1002/pd.4013. View

12.

Brehant J, MONTAGNIER J, Meunier J . [Treatment of tumors in the advanced stage of the head and neck by intra-carotid chemotherapy. Study of 60 cases. Significance of the superficial temporal artery as route of introduction]. Ann Chir. 1965; 19(15):1140-52. View

13.

Nassr A, Hessami K, Berghella V, Bibbo C, Shirdel Abdolmaleki A, Marsoosi V . Angle of progression measured using transperineal ultrasound for prediction of uncomplicated operative vaginal delivery: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2022; 60(3):338-345. DOI: 10.1002/uog.24886. View

14.

Malvasi A, Cicinelli E, Baldini G, Vimercati A, Beck R, Dellino M . Prolonged Dystocic Labor in Neuraxial Analgesia and the Role of Enkephalin Neurotransmitters: An Experimental Study. Int J Mol Sci. 2023; 24(4). PMC: 9962106. DOI: 10.3390/ijms24043767. View

15.

Tse W, Chaemsaithong P, Chan W, Kwan A, Huang J, Appiah K . Labor progress determined by ultrasound is different in women requiring cesarean delivery from those who experience a vaginal delivery following induction of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019; 221(4):335.e1-335.e18. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.05.040. View

16.

Rizzo G, Ghi T, Henrich W, Tutschek B, Kamel R, Lees C . Ultrasound in labor: clinical practice guideline and recommendation by the WAPM-World Association of Perinatal Medicine and the PMF-Perinatal Medicine Foundation. J Perinat Med. 2022; 50(8):1007-1029. DOI: 10.1515/jpm-2022-0160. View

17.

Youssef A, Bellussi F, Montaguti E, Maroni E, Salsi G, Morselli-Labate A . Agreement between two- and three-dimensional transperineal ultrasound methods for assessment of fetal head-symphysis distance in active labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 43(2):183-8. DOI: 10.1002/uog.13204. View

18.

Malvasi A, Zaami S, Tinelli A, Trojano G, Vergallo G, Marinelli E . Kristeller maneuvers or fundal pressure and maternal/neonatal morbidity: obstetric and judicial literature review. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2018; 32(15):2598-2607. DOI: 10.1080/14767058.2018.1441278. View

19.

Malvasi A, Vinciguerra M, Lamanna B, Cascardi E, Damiani G, Muzzupapa G . Asynclitism and Its Ultrasonographic Rediscovery in Labor Room to Date: A Systematic Review. Diagnostics (Basel). 2022; 12(12). PMC: 9776610. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12122998. View

20.

Iversen J, Kahrs B, Eggebo T . There are 4, not 7, cardinal movements in labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2021; 3(6):100436. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2021.100436. View