Publication:


abstract

ObjectiveStandards of care regarding obstetric management of life-threatening anomalies are not defined. It is hypothesised that physicians' management of these pregnancies is variable and influenced by demographic factors.DesignA questionnaire was mailed to members of the Society of Maternal-fetal Medicine with valid US addresses assessing obstetric management of both 'uniformly lethal' (eg, anencephaly, renal agenesis) and 'uniformly severe, commonly lethal' (eg, trisomy 13 and 18) anomalies. Respondents were asked to answer as if not limited by state/institutional restrictions. Fisher's exact or χ(2) tests were used as appropriate and correction made for multiple comparisons in analyses that were not prespecified.ResultsThe response rate was 36% (732/2038). Nearly 100% of respondents discuss termination for both uniformly and commonly lethal anomalies. In continuing pregnancies, with patient request for obstetric non-intervention 99% of providers would comply for either uniformly or commonly lethal anomalies. The majority 'encourage' such management, but some were non-directive or discouraged this management. In continuing pregnancies, with patient request for full obstetric intervention the majority of respondents was willing to comply for both uniformly (71%) and commonly (82%) lethal anomalies. While most practitioners 'discouraged' full intervention, some were non-directive or encouraged this management. Demographics and severity of anomaly influenced counselling.ConclusionDiscrepancies exist regarding the management of life-threatening fetal anomalies. Patients may be offered different options based on practitioner demographics. The majority of physicians comply with patient wishes. Differences were noted when comparing the management of lethal with that of severe commonly lethal anomalies, suggesting that practitioners make a distinction when counselling patients.

Related Articles
Review Evaluation of prenatally diagnosed structural congenital anomalies.
J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2009
Review Evaluation of prenatally diagnosed structural congenital anomalies.
Gagnon A, Wilson RD, Allen VM, Audibert F, Blight C, Brock JA, Désilets VA, Johnson JA, Langlois S, Murphy-Kaulbeck L, et al. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2009 Sep; 31(9):875-81, 882-9.
Prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidy in singleton pregnancies.
J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2011
Prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidy in singleton pregnancies.
Chitayat D, Langlois S, Wilson RD, Genetics Committee of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, Prenatal Diagnosis Committee of the Canadian College of Medical Geneticists. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2011 Jul; 33(7):736-50.
Responsibly counselling women about the clinical management of pregnancies complicated by severe fetal anomalies.
J Med Ethics. 2012
Responsibly counselling women about the clinical management of pregnancies complicated by severe fetal anomalies.
Chervenak F, McCullough LB. J Med Ethics. 2012 Feb 13; . Epub 2012 Feb 13.
Policy versus practice: comparison of prescribing therapy and durable medical equipment in medical and educational settings.
Pediatrics. 2004
Policy versus practice: comparison of prescribing therapy and durable medical equipment in medical and educational settings.
Sneed RC, May WL, Stencel C. Pediatrics. 2004 Nov; 114(5):e612-25.
Review [Twenty years of experience in advanced ultrasound scanning for fetal anomalies in Rotterdam].
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2003
Review [Twenty years of experience in advanced ultrasound scanning for fetal anomalies in Rotterdam].
Wladimiroff JW, Cohen-Overbeek TE, Ursem NT, Bijma H, Los FJ. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2003 Oct 25; 147(43):2106-10.