Safe Service Delivery of a Complex Early Pregnancy Problem: Caesarean Scar Pregnancy.

Caesarean Scar Pregnancy (CSP) is an ectopic pregnancy with implantation into the niche of the uterine scar. We aimed to describe the local management of consecutive cases of CSP to develop a standard operating procedure (SOP). Between December 2019 and June 2022, there were 19,100 maternities. Of these, 23 were CSPs in 19 patients. Median BMI was 29 (range 20.5-52), median number of Caesarean deliveries (CS) was 2 (range 1-4) and 7/23 (30%) were cigarette smokers. At diagnosis, 9/23 were live pregnancies, 3/23 were retained products of conception (RPOC), 9/23 were pregnancies of uncertain viability (PUV), and 2/23 were non-viable. In six, the initial management was expectant, surgical suction evacuation with transrectal ultrasound guidance in 16, and one had a hysterectomy. The median blood loss was 100 mL (range 50-2000 mL). Two patients (9%) required a blood transfusion. Median hospital stay was 1 day (range 0-4). At follow-up after 10 weeks, no patients had an ongoing haematoma, and one had significant RPOC electing hysterectomy. Eight women were known to have 9 subsequent pregnancies (recurrent CSP n = 4, livebirth n = 2, miscarriage n = 2, tubal ectopic n = 1). Outcomes as rated by low blood loss, short hospital stay, and rare need for further intervention were favorable. Factors associated included prompt ultrasonographic diagnosis, availability of transrectal ultrasound guided surgery, and specialist follow-up, which form the basis of the SOP.

Implementing a community model of early pregnancy care.

BACKGROUND: In the UK Early Pregnancy Assessment Units (EPAUs) are usually situated alongside hospital maternity and gynaecology services. In June 2018, the Oxford EPAU relocated from the John Radcliffe Hospital to a community clinic. This is to our knowledge, the UK's first community-based EPAU. This change was inspired by our patient feedback describing the co-location of the EPAU with maternity services as distressing. METHODS: Following the introduction of the community EPAU we developed a database to capture information on the patients seen in the clinic. This is a retrospective observational study of a single cohort of patients attending the clinic over an 8 month period. Data was collected from 1st July 2018 to 28th February 2019. This data included clinical, safety and patient experience outcomes. RESULTS: Two thousand nine hundred and twenty patient episodes were recorded, 1,932 were new patients. Mean waiting time to be seen in clinic was 1.3 days. When miscarriage was confirmed 48.6% chose conservative management, 19.9% chose medical management, and 31.5% chose surgical management. The mean rate of ambulance transfers to hospital was 3.1 per month. Of all patients seen in EPAU 32 had unplanned admissions, which accounted for 2.7% of all patients seen in EPAU. Patient feedback questionnaires have been consistently positive. CONCLUSION: The development of a community EPAU has improved services to allow care closer to home in an environment separate from maternity care. Our data shows that a community EPAU can deliver timely, good quality patient care, is safe, and a service valued by patients. Further research is indicated to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of community EPAUs and the long term safety and effectiveness of care.

Primary care follow-up and measured mental health outcomes among women referred for ultrasound assessment of pain and/or bleeding in early pregnancy: a quantitative questionnaire study.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the extent of primary care follow-up and mental health outcomes among women referred for ultrasound assessment of pain and/or bleeding in early pregnancy, including those whose pregnancy is found to be viable on ultrasound assessment. DESIGN: Questionnaire study with prospective follow-up. SETTING: Urgent gynaecology clinic in secondary care, England. PARTICIPANTS: 57 women participated in the study. Entry criteria: referral to the urgent gynaecology clinic with pain and/or bleeding in early pregnancy; gestation less than 16 weeks (the clinic's own 'cut-off'); no previous attendance at the clinic during the current pregnancy. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: inability to understand English or to provide informed consent. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidence of primary care follow-up among women referred to the urgent gynaecology clinic; incidence of women with measured mental health scores suggesting significant symptoms of distress. RESULTS: Fewer than 1 in 10 women referred for ultrasound assessment of pain and/or bleeding in early pregnancy had follow-up arrangements made with their general practitioner (GP). Most women who had GP follow-up found it helpful and a significant minority of women who did not have GP follow-up felt that it would have been helpful. Following ultrasound assessment, more than one-third of women had significant symptoms of distress. Symptoms of distress, particularly anxiety, were present among those women found to have viable pregnancies, as well as among those with non-viable pregnancies. CONCLUSIONS: GPs are advised to consider offering follow-up to all women referred for ultrasound assessment of pain and/or bleeding in early pregnancy. Researchers in this area are advised to consider the experiences of women with pain and/or bleeding in early pregnancy whose pregnancies are ultimately found to be viable on ultrasound scan.