Long-acting reversible contraception knowledge, attitudes and use among HIV-infected and -uninfected women and their providers.

OBJECTIVE(S): To describe differences in contraceptive knowledge, attitudes and use among HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected women served by an academic medical center in New York City and to describe gaps in knowledge and practice of gynecologic and HIV clinicians providing care at the same clinic sites where patients completed surveys. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a survey comparing contraceptive knowledge, attitudes, reproductive histories and long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) use in HIV-infected and -uninfected women. We also conducted a survey to elicit clinician demographic characteristics and education, contraceptive practice patterns and their knowledge of current contraceptive guidelines. We surveyed clinicians and patients at five ambulatory sites. RESULTS: We screened 90% of patients approached. All 257 women who were eligible completed a survey. These included 107 (42%) HIV-infected women and 150 (58%) HIV-uninfected women. HIV-infected women were older, were more likely to be black/African-American, were less likely to be Latina, were more likely to receive public assistance and had lower educational attainment. HIV-infected women reported lower lifetime LARC use (12% vs. 28%) and higher recent condom use (58% vs. 25%) than HIV-uninfected women. Both groups reported similar attitudes toward intrauterine devices (IUDs) and implants. HIV clinicians were less likely to have had training in or discuss LARC methods with their patients. CONCLUSIONS: HIV-infected women were less likely to be current (last 30 days) or ever LARC users, despite having similar attitudes toward IUDs and implants, compared to HIV-uninfected women. HIV providers had lower levels of knowledge of HIV-specific contraceptive guidelines compared with gynecology practitioners. IMPLICATIONS: HIV-infected women and their providers share a knowledge gap regarding LARC. Increased interdisciplinary collaboration may help mitigate the resulting disparities in access to highly effective contraception in HIV-infected women. Knowledge of HIV-specific contraceptive guidelines and ability to place contraceptive implants were low among all surveyed providers, suggesting need for additional training.

Eisenmenger Syndrome in Pregnancy: When Is It Time for ECMO?: A Case Report.

We report the case of a 21-year-old primiparous woman at 22 weeks gestation who presented with a large uncorrected ventricular septal defect, severe pulmonary hypertension, and Eisenmenger syndrome. The patient elected for termination of pregnancy, which was performed under regional anesthesia. Hemodynamic changes apparently associated with uterine contraction immediately after termination resulted in increased right to left shunting across the ventricular septal defect requiring urgent venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Thrombocytopenia and systemic anticoagulation for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation presented a challenge for removal of the epidural catheter. Pulmonary hypertension was managed and she was discharged on postoperative day 35.

A noninferiority randomized controlled trial to compare transabdominal and transvaginal sonography for eligibility assessment prior to medical abortion.

OBJECTIVES: To compare transabdominal sonography (TAS) to transvaginal sonography (TVS) in medical abortion eligibility assessment, specifically to measure how often clinicians chose to order additional testing for eligibility assessment following TAS and TVS, and to look for differences by patient and clinician characteristics. Also, to compare patient acceptability between the two modalities. STUDY DESIGN: This pragmatic multisite randomized noninferiority trial compared TAS to TVS at 10 New York City and New Jersey health centers that provide medical abortion. Women seeking medical abortion were randomized 1:1 to receive TAS or TVS. Following the study ultrasound examination, clinicians determined whether participants were eligible for medical abortion based on these results or warranted further testing. All participants completed an acceptability questionnaire. We compared additional testing and acceptability between TAS and TVS. RESULTS: Of those randomized to TAS, 63/317 (19.9%) received additional testing compared to 15/312 (4.8%) randomized to TVS. After TAS, most additional testing consisted of a same-day TVS. Other tests included ß-hCG testing, scheduled repeat sonography or return visit. After TAS, 13.4% seen by physicians and 27.6% seen by advanced practice nurses (APNs) received additional testing (p<.01). Additional testing was more common in early gestational ages for both groups. We enrolled too few women with a body mass index (BMI) >35 kg/m2 to make comparisons. Participants found TAS more acceptable than TVS, and two thirds preferred TAS for future care. CONCLUSIONS: TAS provided sufficient information for clinicians to assess medical abortion eligibility without additional tests for most patients. However, the frequency of additional testing was exceedingly close to our predefined noninferiority boundary. Why APNs ordered substantially more additional testing than physicians is unclear. TAS was more acceptable to patients than TVS. IMPLICATIONS: TVS use requires high-level disinfection, which is resource-intensive and thus can be a barrier to care. Instead, TAS can be first-line for most women, reducing resources needed to provide medical abortion. Further research could help to establish gestational age and BMI thresholds beyond which TVS would be a more informative first test. We also need to evaluate whether additional training in using TAS would decrease additional testing.