Andersen Kathryn, Fjerstad Mary, Basnett Indira, Neupane Shailes, Acre Valerie, Sharma Sharad Kumar, Jackson Emily
Ipas, Chapel Hill, NC, United States of America.
WomanCare Global, 8910 University Center Lane, San Diego, CA, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2017 Sep 7;12(9):e0178248. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0178248. eCollection 2017.
To determine if pregnant, literate women and female community health volunteers (FCHVs) in Nepal can accurately determine a woman's eligibility for medical abortion (MA) using a toolkit, compared to comprehensive abortion care (CAC) trained providers.
We conducted a prospective diagnostic accuracy study in which women presenting for first trimester abortion, and FCHVs, independently assessed each woman's eligibility for MA using a modified gestational dating wheel to determine gestational age and a nine-point checklist of MA contraindications or cautions. Ability to determine MA eligibility was compared to experienced CAC-providers using Nepali standard of care.
Both women (n = 3131) and FCHVs (n = 165) accurately interpreted the wheel 96% of the time, and the eligibility checklist 72% and 95% of the time, respectively. Of the 649 women who reported potential contraindications or cautions on the checklist, 88% misidentified as eligible. Positive predictive value (PPV) of women's assessment of eligibility based on gestational age was 93% (95% CI 92, 94) compared to CAC-providers' (n = 47); PPV of the medical contraindications checklist and overall (90% [95% CI 88, 91] and 93% [95% CI 92, 94] respectively) must be interpreted with caution given women's difficulty using the checklist. PPV of FCHVs' determinations were 93% (95% CI 92, 94), 90% (95% CI 89,91), and 93% (95% CI 91, 94) respectively.
Although a promising strategy to assist women and FCHVs to assess MA eligibility, further refinement of the eligibility tools, particularly the checklist, is needed before their widespread use.
与接受过全面堕胎护理(CAC)培训的医疗服务提供者相比,确定尼泊尔识字的孕妇和女性社区健康志愿者(FCHV)能否使用工具包准确判定女性进行药物流产(MA)的资格。
我们进行了一项前瞻性诊断准确性研究,在此研究中,前来接受孕早期堕胎的女性和FCHV使用改良的孕周推算轮来确定孕周,并使用包含9项内容的MA禁忌或注意事项清单,分别独立评估每位女性进行MA的资格。使用尼泊尔的护理标准,将判定MA资格的能力与经验丰富的CAC医疗服务提供者进行比较。
女性(n = 3131)和FCHV(n = 165)分别有96%、72%和95%的时间能够准确解读孕周推算轮和资格清单。在清单上报告有潜在禁忌或注意事项的649名女性中,88%被误判为符合资格。与CAC医疗服务提供者(n = 47)相比,女性基于孕周判定资格的阳性预测值(PPV)为93%(95%CI 92, 94);鉴于女性在使用清单方面存在困难,对于医疗禁忌清单以及总体情况的PPV(分别为90%[95%CI 88, 91]和93%[95%CI 92, 94])必须谨慎解读。FCHV判定的PPV分别为93%(95%CI 92, 94)、90%(95%CI 89,91)和93%(95%CI 91, 94)。
尽管这是协助女性和FCHV评估MA资格的一项有前景的策略,但在广泛使用之前,需要对资格判定工具,尤其是清单,进行进一步完善。