A qualitative study of digoxin injection before dilation and evacuation

Society of Family Planning Clinical Recommendation: Induction of fetal asystole before abortion Jointly developed with the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine

This document serves as a revision to the Society of Family Planning's 2010 guidelines, integrating literature on new techniques and research and addressing the clinical, medical, and sociolegal questions surrounding the induction of fetal asystole. Insufficient evidence exists to recommend routine induction of fetal asystole before previable medication and procedural abortion. However, at periviable gestations and after fetal viability, inducing fetal asystole before abortion prevents the infrequent but serious occurrence of unanticipated expulsion of a fetus with cardiorespiratory activity (Best Practice). Defining viability is complicated as it represents a physiological continuum impacted by gestational duration along with multiple other individual clinical factors and circumstances; therefore, the exact gestational duration to offer fetal asystole will depend on the setting and clinical circumstances. If induction of fetal asystole before abortion is available, we recommend engaging in patient-centered counseling regarding the risks and benefits of induction of fetal asystole in the setting of each unique pregnancy scenario and the patient's beliefs and priorities (Best Practice). We recommend that clinicians identify the optimal pharmacologic agent to administer for a given clinical scenario based on factors such as availability of each agent; the time frame in which fetal asystole needs to be established; and clinicians' technical ability, preferences, and practice (Best Practice). Potassium chloride, lidocaine, and digoxin are all acceptable pharmaceutical agents to induce fetal asystole before abortion. To establish asystole rapidly, we suggest the use of potassium chloride (via intracardiac or intrafunic injection) or lidocaine (via intracardiac or intrafunic injection) (GRADE 2C), although intrathoracic administration of lidocaine may be acceptable. We recommend potassium chloride not be used if intracardiac or intrafunic location cannot be achieved to avoid the risk of accidental administration to the pregnant individual and because insufficient data support its efficacy via other intrafetal locations (GRADE 1C). When using digoxin, we recommend intrafetal administration (GRADE 1C), although intraamniotic administration may be acceptable depending on a clinician's technical ability and setting. Because digoxin may take several hours to induce asystole, an alternative agent should be considered in settings where fetal asystole must be confirmed rapidly.

Society of Family Planning Clinical Recommendation: Induction of fetal asystole before abortion Jointly developed with the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine☆,☆☆

This document serves as a revision to the Society of Family Planning's 2010 guidelines, integrating literature on new techniques and research and addressing the clinical, medical, and sociolegal questions surrounding the induction of fetal asystole. Insufficient evidence exists to recommend routine induction of fetal asystole before previable medication and procedural abortion. However, at periviable gestations and after fetal viability, inducing fetal asystole before abortion prevents the infrequent but serious occurrence of unanticipated expulsion of a fetus with cardiorespiratory activity (Best Practice). Defining viability is complicated as it represents a physiological continuum impacted by gestational duration along with multiple other individual clinical factors and circumstances; therefore, the exact gestational duration to offer fetal asystole will depend on the setting and clinical circumstances. If induction of fetal asystole before abortion is available, we recommend engaging in patient-centered counseling regarding the risks and benefits of induction of fetal asystole in the setting of each unique pregnancy scenario and the patient's beliefs and priorities (Best Practice). We recommend that clinicians identify the optimal pharmacologic agent to administer for a given clinical scenario based on factors such as availability of each agent; the time frame in which fetal asystole needs to be established; and clinicians' technical ability, preferences, and practice (Best Practice). Potassium chloride, lidocaine, and digoxin are all acceptable pharmaceutical agents to induce fetal asystole before abortion. To establish asystole rapidly, we suggest the use of potassium chloride (via intracardiac or intrafunic injection) or lidocaine (via intracardiac or intrafunic injection) (GRADE 2C), although intrathoracic administration of lidocaine may be acceptable. We recommend potassium chloride not be used if intracardiac or intrafunic location cannot be achieved to avoid the risk of accidental administration to the pregnant individual and because insufficient data support its efficacy via other intrafetal locations (GRADE 1C). When using digoxin, we recommend intrafetal administration (GRADE 1C), although intraamniotic administration may be acceptable depending on a clinician's technical ability and setting. Because digoxin may take several hours to induce asystole, an alternative agent should be considered in settings where fetal asystole must be confirmed rapidly.

Is it an abortion: Classification of pregnancy-ending interventions after 24 weeks in the presence of lethal fetal anomalies

OBJECTIVES

To determine how obstetrician-gynecologists categorize pregnancy-ending interventions in the setting of lethal fetal anomalies.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a sequential explanatory mixed-methods study of U.S. obstetrician-gynecologists from May to July 2021. We distributed a cross-sectional online survey via email and social media and completed qualitative telephone interviews with a nested group of participants. We assessed institutional classification as induced abortion versus indicated delivery for six scenarios of ending a pregnancy with lethal anomalies after 24 weeks, comparing classification using McNemar chi-square tests with Benjamini-Hochberg correction for multiple comparisons with a false discovery rate of 0.05. We performed the thematic analysis of qualitative data and then performed a mixed-methods analysis.

RESULTS

We included 205 respondents; most were female (84.4%), had provided abortion care (80.2%), and were general OB/GYNs (59.3%), with broad representation across pre-Dobbs state and institutional abortion policies. Twenty-one qualitative participants had similar characteristics to the whole sample. All scenarios were classified as induced abortion by the majority of respondents, ranging from 53.2% for 32-week induction for anencephaly, to 82.9% for feticidal injection with 24-week induction for anencephaly. Mixed-methods analysis revealed the relevance of gestational age (later interventions less likely to be considered induced abortion) and procedure method and setting (dilation and evacuation, feticidal injection, and freestanding facility all increasing classification as induced abortion).

CONCLUSIONS

There is wide variation in the classification of pregnancy-ending interventions for lethal fetal anomalies, even among trained obstetrician-gynecologists. Method, timing, and location of ending a nonviable pregnancy influence classification, though the perinatal outcome is unchanged.

IMPLICATIONS

The classification of pregnancy-ending interventions for lethal fetal anomalies after 24 weeks as indicated delivery versus induced abortion is reflective of sociopolitical regulatory factors as opposed to medical science. The regulatory requirement for classification negatively impacts access to care, especially in environments where induced abortion is legally restricted.

The Use of Feticidal Agents Before Dilation and Evacuation or Induction of Labor for Later Abortion

Abortion is a common medical procedure in the United States that is frequently the target of political and legal restrictions. These restrictions can negatively impact care and interfere with the patient-provider relationship. In this paper, we aim to review the historic context in which feticidal agents became more utilized in later abortion; describe current practices and protocols of using feticidal agents use for later abortion by dilation and evacuation and induction of labor; evaluate patient and provider perspectives on feticidal agent use; and propose areas of further ethical and research inquiry to characterize the use of these agents in later abortion procedures.

A New Approach on the pain management of intramuscular injection: A Triple-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Pain management is an important part of care provided by nurses.

AIMS

The present study aimed to investigate the effect of an innovative method named the skin traction, pressure, and rapid muscle release (TPR) on reducing IM injection pain compared with the Z-track injection method DESIGN: This triple-blind clinical trial investigated 63 patients who required Methocarbamol injection.

METHODS

Two, 5-cc methocarbamol injections were given to each patient by the two techniques in two of his/her muscles. In the TPR technique, after applying skin traction and imposing deep pressure on the muscle, the needle was inserted at a 90° angle near the skin and the muscle was released rapidly towards the needle. Hence, the needle was embedded in the muscle. However, muscle release was not applied in the Z-track method. The visual analog scale (VAS) was used to measure pain intensity. For data analysis, T-independent and χ² tests were used.

RESULTS

The findings showed that the mean pain score in TPR and Z-track methods was 1.68 ± 1.20 and 3.76 ± 1.42, respectively. The difference was statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study showed that the innovative method (TPR) can be used as a substitute for the Z-track method to reduce IM injection pain.