Malvasi Antonio, Damiani Gianluca Raffaello, DI Naro Edoardo, Vitagliano Amerigo, Dellino Miriam, Achiron Reuven, Ioannis Kosmas, Vimercati Antonella, Gaetani Maria, Cicinelli Ettore, Vinciguerra Marina, Ricci Ilaria, Tinelli Andrea, Baldini Giorgio Maria, Silvestris Erica, Trojano Giuseppe
Department of Biomedical and Human Oncological Science (DIMO), 1st Unit of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, University of Bari Aldo Moro, 70124 Bari, Italy.
Laboratory of Human Physiology, Phystech BioMed School, Faculty of Biological & Medical Physics, Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (State University), 141701 Moscow, Russia.
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X. 2023 Oct 12;20:100246. doi: 10.1016/j.eurox.2023.100246. eCollection 2023 Dec.
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.
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.
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.
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.
产时超声（IU）用于产房；即使IU用于监测分娩中的妇女，但由于它是一项新技术，不太常被很好地“接受”，所以可能会被视为一种不适甚至是“产科暴力”。一组临床医生旨在在进行经阴唇超声（TU）之前获得患者的知情同意。本研究的目的是评估经阴唇和经腹产时超声的接受度。
在巴里大学医院（妇产科）进行的这项研究中，纳入了103名单胎头先露且处于第一或第二产程的患者。进行了统计频率和关联分析。作为一个显著结果，我们考虑了安心/满意度和“产科暴力”。经腹和经阴唇进行IU检查以确定胎位、头部位置、进展角度和头部与会阴的距离。在第一和第二产程中，发放了ASIUG问卷（普利亚产时超声研究组）。
74名（71.84%）患者接受了IU检查，29名患者进行了阴道检查（28.15%）。接受IU检查的患者经历的“暴力”明显较少（74例中的73例/98.65%），只有1人（1/1，1.35%）记录有此情况。相反，10名患者（10/29）在阴道检查（VE）后感觉有“暴力”（34.48%），而19名患者（65.52%）没有类似反应。更多患者对使用IU检查感到满意（74例中的71例/95.95%），只有3名患者（3/4，0.05%）感到不安。阴道检查组情况不同。只有17名患者（17/29，58.62%）感到舒适，12名患者（41.38%）感到不安。
在我们的研究中，大多数患者对使用IU检查接受度良好，因为它可以让女性对胎儿状况放心。此外，在产科医生进行超声检查时，她们可以在屏幕上看到胎儿，与传统的阴道检查相比，这对于视觉反馈很重要。
