Medical Students' Perspectives on Family Planning and Impact on Specialty Choice

Importance

Physicians are known to delay childbearing compared with nonphysicians and to experience higher rates of age-related pregnancy complications. Delay of childbearing is more pronounced in surgical specialties, and family planning and building goals may influence specialty choice.

Objective

To assess medical students' perspectives on the development of family planning goals and the timing of family building within a medical career to elucidate how these perceptions impact their choice of specialty.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This qualitative study included fourth-year medical students at the University of Toronto Temerty Faculty of Medicine, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, and was conducted between May and August 2021. Participants were purposively sampled to maximize diversity of gender and specialty choice. Interviews were conducted via videoconferencing software that were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and verified for accuracy. Thematic analysis was completed independently by 2 researchers and consensus on final themes was reached through discussion among study investigators. Data were analyzed between September and December 2021.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Participants were asked to share their perceptions of personal family planning goals, support currently in place, family planning education in medicine and factors contributing to their choice of specialty and program. Thematic analysis was completed.

Results

A total of 34 fourth-year medical students (median [range] age, 26 [24-33] years; 23 females [67.6%]) were interviewed. Four main themes were identified: (1) there is no ideal time to family build in a medical career, (2) family planning is a taboo topic, (3) surgical specialties offer less support for family building, and (4) residents who have children are perceived to place a burden on their colleagues. Medical students considered their family planning while deliberating among specialty choices and their experiences were highly influential in shaping their specialty selection.

Conclusions and Relevance

Results of this qualitative study suggest that medical students perceive that family building during training may have unfavorable implications for team dynamics and relationships with colleagues, and these perceptions may affect specialty choice and family planning goals. Integration of family planning discussions and support for family building into medical curricula is needed along with efforts to improve culture by supporting team dynamics and workload when students take parental leave.

Pregnancy outcomes with donor oocyte embryos in patients diagnosed with adenomyosis using the Morphological Uterus Sonographic Assessment criteria

OBJECTIVE

To use the Morphological Uterus Sonographic Assessment (MUSA) criteria to evaluate the impact of adenomyosis on the live birth rate after donor egg embryo transfer.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary fertility care center.

PATIENT(S)

A total of 100 patients who received 223 donor embryo transfers from January 2014-2020. All patients underwent ultrasound before their first transfer.

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Our study was powered (80%) to assess the primary outcome of live birth rate; the secondary outcomes included the clinical pregnancy, biochemical pregnancy, and miscarriage rates.

RESULT(S)

Only 22 of 100 patients were diagnosed with adenomyosis on the original ultrasound report. When the MUSA criteria were applied, 76 patients had at least 1 possible ultrasonographic feature of adenomyosis; all 76 patients had an interrupted junctional zone. The second most common feature of adenomyosis was a globular and/or enlarged uterus (89.4%). Adjusted modeling demonstrated that a single ultrasound feature, 2 or more features, specific features, or the location of features did not affect the live birth outcome. A per-centimeter increase in the diameter of focal lesions was significantly associated with a decrease in the odds of live birth by the factor of 0.91.

CONCLUSION(S)

To our knowledge, our study is the first to characterize adenomyosis using the MUSA criteria in the donor oocyte population. Overall, our data were reassuring in that the ultrasonographic features of adenomyosis may not impact reproductive outcomes. However, we identified that the location and size of focal lesions may be important and should be studied further.

Current diagnosis and management of adenomyosis in Canada: A survey of Canadian gynaecologists

Objective:

The purpose of this study was to understand how Canadian Obstetricians/Gynaecologists (OBGYNs) diagnose and manage adenomyosis.

Methods:

This cross-sectional study was performed via an online survey distributed to 262 OBGYNs at three Canadian universities (University of Toronto, University of Calgary, and McMaster University).

Results:

A total of 137 responses were obtained out of 262 OBGYNs (52.3%) with a completion rate of 98%. Adenomyosis was a diagnosis in 6%–10% of patients seen by OBGYNs. The most common clinical symptoms included heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) (82.8%) and dysmenorrhea (91.0%). Most participants (83%) used transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) as first-line imaging for diagnosis of adenomyosis. Many respondents (35.8%) indicated that adenomyosis was not associated with infertility or recurrent miscarriage. Treatment considerations for all patients with adenomyosis included levonorgestrel intra-uterine system (LNG-IUS) (91.8%), hysterectomy (88.8%), expectant management (85.1%), combined hormonal contraceptives (CHC) (83.6%), tranexamic acid (81.3%), gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists (64.2%), depo-provera (64.2%), dienogest (57.5%), and norethisterone acetate (NETA) (40.3%). Treatments for adenomyosis in patients wishing to conceive included expectant management (85.1%), tranexamic acid (79.1%), CHC (44.8%), LNG-IUS (32.8%), and GnRH agonists (35.8%). Excision of adenomyosis would only be offered by 24% of respondents. Uterine artery embolization (UAE) would not be used in the treatment of adenomyosis by 44% of respondents. Finally, 82.8% of respondents would use improvement of clinical symptoms to follow treatment success.

Conclusion:

Practice varies across Canada despite recent emerging evidence in the diagnosis and management of adenomyosis, highlighting the need for a clinical practice guideline on adenomyosis.