Obstetrician-gynecologists as primary care physicians: the Oregon experience--early perceptions regarding the effects of legislative action

Assessment of Screening, Treatment, and Prevention of Perinatal Infections in the Philadelphia Birth Cohort

Certain population groups are at risk for inadequate prenatal care and transmission of perinatal infections. Philadelphia's birth cohort comprises largely at-risk groups and its infant mortality rate is among the nation's highest. This study identifies factors associated with infectious disease screening, treatment, and prevention in Philadelphia. Delivery charts for a probability sample of 550 patients were reviewed. Demographic factors associated with prenatal and delivery care were identified through Pearson chi-square, analysis of variance, and stepwise logistic regression analysis. Nonstandard and incomplete documentation complicated abstraction. Some prenatal care was noted in 95% of the records and screening varied by disease. Factors independently associated with care include maternal race, insurance status, and maternal age. Screening for infections with well-established recommendations (hepatitis B virus, rubella, syphilis) occurred more often than for group B streptococcus, HIV, hepatitis C virus, and varicella. Adoption of standard reporting forms and processes could improve practice and aid in quality improvement efforts and patient communication.

Colorectal cancer screening compliance and contemplation in gynecology patients

OBJECTIVE

Colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) should be a necessary part of gynecology (GYN) providers' preventive practices. The purpose of our study is to examine CRCS recommendations and adherence in this population.

METHODS

A questionnaire was administered to a prospective cohort of patients awaiting health maintenance exams at six academic and private gynecology offices. Patients reported demographics, CRC/breast/cervical screening adherence, CRCS recommendations, and future likelihood of CRCS.

RESULTS

A total of 461 women aged 51 years and older completed the questionnaire. Sixty-six percent of respondents were compliant with CRCS compared to 93% and 86% for breast and cervical cancer screening, respectively (p < 0.001). GYN providers recommended CRCS in 43% of patients. Sixty-three percent were planning to undergo future CRCS. On multivariable analysis, characteristics associated with CRCS adherence included (odds ratio, 95% confidence interval): older age (1.1 per year, 1.1-1.2), previous mammography (3.7, 1.4-9.7), family history (FH) of CRC/polyps (1.9, 1.0-3.4), friend with CRC (2.6, 1.5-4.7), and any doctor recommending CRCS (8.2, 4.6-14.7). CRCS rates were higher among patients who received a recommendation from a PCP (primary care provider) than from a GYN provider. Factors associated with intention to undergo CRCS include previous mammography (1.4, 4.2-12.0), any doctor recommendation (6.4, 3.7-11.0), and FH of CRC/polyps (3.5, 1.9-6.3). CRCS recommendations by both GYNs and PCPs had a greater impact on CRCS contemplation than those from a PCP or GYN alone.

CONCLUSION

In gynecology patients, having multiple providers recommend CRCS increases the likelihood of patients' intentions to undergo CRCS. However, CRCS compliance is primarily driven solely by PCP recommendations. Regardless, strategies must be in place to prompt gynecologists and nurse practitioners to discuss CRCS in eligible patients.

Colorectal cancer screening practices among obstetrician/gynecologists and nurse practitioners

OBJECTIVE

Obstetrician/gynecologists (Ob/Gyn) and nurse practitioners (NP) are essential providers of primary and preventive care for their female patients. Therefore, colorectal cancer (CRC) screening should be part of their routine preventive practices. The purpose of our study is to evaluate the CRC screening practices of these providers.

METHODS

A self-administered survey was mailed to a national sample of 1130 Ob/Gyns and NPs to assess providers' demographics, current CRC screening practices, and familiarity with CRC guidelines.

RESULTS

Three hundred thirty-six providers (29.7%) returned our survey (54% Ob/Gyns and 46% NPs). Three fourths of providers routinely performed screening for CRC, compared with 95% for breast and cervical cancer. Routine CRC screening was more common among Ob/Gyns (87.2%) than NPs (61.7%) (p < 0.001). Slightly over half of providers correctly identified the recommended age to begin CRC screening for the average-risk patient, with no significant difference between provider types. Overall, Ob/Gyns scored higher than NPs on a series of questions assessing CRC screening (p < 0.03). Several provider factors were found to be significantly associated with screening practices, including practicing >10 years (p < 0.01), practicing in a multispecialty group (2.62 times more likely), and having an older patient population (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Ob/Gyns and NPs underuse CRC screening compared with breast and cervical cancer screening and lack knowledge about appropriate use of CRC screening modalities. Opportunities to further educate Ob/Gyns and NPs should be sought to improve compliance with current CRC screening guidelines.

Medical practices for prevention of perinatal infections in Puerto Rico

Recommendations for screening for maternal infections and interventions to prevent disease in the fetus or newborn have been in place in Puerto Rico for more than 10 years. However, compliance with these recommendations has not been widely documented. We evaluated compliance with rubella/hepatitis B prenatal screening and vaccination recommendations, assessed hospital screening practices for syphilis and HIV, and determined risk factors for suboptimal prenatal care. Records of a random, stratified sample of 2003 pregnant women delivering in eight maternity hospitals in Puerto Rico in 2002 were reviewed. Obstetric prenatal and postnatal records were also reviewed when rubella/hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) screening was not available at the hospital, and to document rubella postpartum vaccination (PPV). Prenatal screening rates were 98.4% for rubella and 98.8% for HBsAg. Overall, 5.4% [95% CI 4.4, 6.5] of women were susceptible to rubella. No eligible women received rubella PPV at the hospital and only 1.5% had documented rubella vaccine prescription at the obstetric records. Only one woman was found to be HBsAg positive and her newborn was adequately treated. However, only 0.9% newborns born to mothers with unknown HBsAg status received hepatitis B vaccine. Screening was documented in 85.7% of the hospital records for HIV and 87.9% for syphilis. Suboptimal prenatal care was more likely among teenagers, low-educated women, and women with >3 previous pregnancies. Screening rates for rubella and hepatitis B were high; however, implementation of recommendations for prevention of rubella and hepatitis B needs to be improved.

The obstetrician-gynecologist's role in adult immunization

Vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs) account for significant morbidities and mortalities in the United States on an annual basis. Despite generally successful childhood vaccine programs, adults remain underimmunized against a variety of common VPDs. Lack of both physician and patient awareness contribute to this deficiency. All primary care providers, including obstetrician-gynecologists, must address this need in their office practices. Clear and authoritative adult vaccine recommendations are established and easily accessible by the clinician. Pregnancy is not an absolute contraindication to vaccine administration. In fact, certain vaccines are specifically indicated during pregnancy in the interest of the mother and her unborn child. Women frequently identify gynecologists as their sole providers of care, further emphasizing the need for attention to this health maintenance activity. New vaccine initiatives, in particular those focused on early newborn infectious conditions, sexually transmitted diseases, and cancer prevention, will likely place the obstetrician-gynecologist at the forefront of this important clinical issue.