Cervical length screening: A randomized trial assessing the impact on visit length and patient attitudes

Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine

Volumn 33, Issue 12, 2014, Pages 2159-2163

  Romero, Stephanie T ^a,c   Holmgren, Calla C ^b   Feltovich, Helen ^b   Porter, T Flint ^b   Esplin, M Sean ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF UTAH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b INTERMOUNTAIN MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

Cervical length screening; Obstetric ultrasound; Sonographic cervical length; Transvaginal cervical length

Indexed keywords

ULTRASONIC APPLICATIONS;

BODY MASS INDEX; CERVICAL LENGTH; DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS; PATIENT ATTITUDES; RANDOMIZED TRIAL; TRANSVAGINAL SONOGRAPHY;

ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

ADULT; AMBULATORY CARE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CERVICAL LENGTH MEASUREMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; EPIDEMIOLOGY; FEMALE; HUMAN; LENGTH OF STAY; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PREGNANCY; PROCEDURES; PSYCHOLOGY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CERVICAL LENGTH MEASUREMENT; FEMALE; FLORIDA; HUMANS; LENGTH OF STAY; OFFICE VISITS; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PREGNANCY;

EID: 84919340305     PISSN: 02784297     EISSN: 15509613     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.7863/ultra.33.12.2159     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Hamilton BE, Hoyert DL, Martin JA, Strobino DM, Guyer B. Annual summary of vital statistics: 2010-2011. Pediatrics 2013; 131:548-558.
2. Esplin MS, O'Brien E, Fraser A, et al. Estimating recurrence of spontaneous preterm delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2008; 112:516-523.
3. Iams JD, Goldenberg RL, Meis PJ, et al. The length of the cervix and the risk of spontaneous premature delivery. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal Fetal Medicine Unit Network. N Engl J Med 1996; 334:567-572.
4. Hibbard JU, Tart M, Moawad AH. Cervical length at 16-22 weeks' gestation and risk for preterm delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2000; 96:972-978.
5. Hassan SS, Romero R, Vidyadhari D, et al. Vaginal progesterone reduces the rate of preterm birth in women with a sonographic short cervix: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011; 38:18-31.
6. Fonseca EB, Celik E, Parra M, Singh M, Nicolaides KH. Progesterone and the risk of preterm birth among women with a short cervix. N Engl J Med 2007; 357:462-469.
7. DeFranco EA, O'Brien JM, Adair CD, et al. Vaginal progesterone is associated with a decrease in risk for early preterm birth and improved neonatal outcome in women with a short cervix: a secondary analysis from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2007; 30:697-705.
8. Werner EF, Han CS, Pettker CM, et al. Universal cervical-length screening to prevent preterm birth: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011; 38:32-37.
9. Parry S, Simhan H, Elovitz M, Iams J. Universal maternal cervical length screening during the second trimester: pros and cons of a strategy to identify women at risk of spontaneous preterm delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012; 207:101-106.
10. Hutcheon JA, Skoll MA, Eastabrook GD, Lim KI. The case for universal cervical length screening to prevent preterm birth: is it strong enough to change practice in Canada? J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2012; 34:1184-1187.
11. Cahill AG, Odibo AO, Caughey AB, et al. Universal cervical length screening and treatment with vaginal progesterone to prevent preterm birth: a decision and economic analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010; 202:548.e1-548.e8.
12. Campbell S. Universal cervical-length screening and vaginal progesterone prevents early preterm births, reduces neonatal morbidity and is cost saving: doing nothing is no longer an option. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011; 38:1-9.
13. Hernandez-Andrade E, Romero R, Ahn H, et al. Transabdominal evaluation of uterine cervical length during pregnancy fails to identify a substantial number of women with a short cervix. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2012; 25:1682-1689.
14. Saul LL, Kurtzman JT, Hagemann C, Ghamsary M, Wing DA. Is transabdominal sonography of the cervix after voiding a reliable method of cervical length assessment? J Ultrasound Med 2008; 27:1305-1311.
15. Roh H, Ji YI, Jung CH, Jeon GH, Chun S, Cho HJ. Transabdominal and transvaginal sonography in midpregnancy. J Ultrasound Med 2013; 32:1721-1728.
16. Friedman AM, Srinivas SK, Parry S, Elovitz MA, Wang E, Schwartz N. Can transabdominal ultrasound be used as a screening test for short cervical length? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 208:109.e1-109.e7.
17. Friedman AM, Schwartz N, Ludmir J, Parry S, Bastek JA, Sehdev HM. Can transabdominal ultrasound identify women at high risk for short cervical length? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2013; 92:637-641.
18. Stone PR, Chan EH, McCowan LM, Taylor RS, Mitchell JM. Transabdominal scanning of the cervix at the 20-week morphology scan: comparison with transvaginal cervical measurements in a healthy nulliparous population. Aust NZ J Obstet Gynaecol 2010; 50:523-527.
19. Clement S, Candy B, Heath V, To M, Nicolaides KH. Transvaginal ultrasound in pregnancy: its acceptability to women and maternal psychological morbidity. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2003; 22:508-514.
20. Braithwaite JM, Economides DL. Acceptability by patients of transvaginal sonography in the elective assessment of the first-trimester fetus. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1997; 9:91-93.
21. Heath VCF, Southall TR, Souka AP, Novakov A, Nicolaides KH. Cervical length at 23 weeks of gestation: relation to demographic characteristics and previous obstetric history. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1998; 12:304-311.
22. Bennett CC, Richards DS. Patient acceptance of endovaginal ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2000; 15:52-55.
23. Mason GC, Maresh MJ. Alterations in bladder volume and the ultrasound appearance of the cervix. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1990; 97:457-458.
24. StataCorp LP. Stata Statistical Software: Release 12. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP; 2011.