Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health

The Korean Society for Preventive Medicine (대한예방의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

How Well Do U.S. Primary Care and Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinicians Screen for Pregnancy Complications at Well Woman Visits? A Retrospective Cohort Study

  • Eli D. Medvescek (Naval Medical Center San Diego) ;
  • Sorana Raiciulescu (Department of Preventive Medicine and Biostatistics, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences) ;
  • Andrew S. Thagard (Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Naval Medical Center Portsmouth) ;
  • Katerina Shvartsman (Department of Gynecologic Surgery & Obstetrics, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences)
  • Received : 2022.11.30
  • Accepted : 2023.02.22
  • Published : 2023.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objectives: Pregnancy complications, including pre-eclampsia, gestational diabetes (GDM), and perinatal mood and anxiety disorders (PMADs), impact long-term health. We compared the frequency of screening documentation for pregnancy complications versus a general medical history at well woman visits between providers in primary care and obstetrics and gynecology. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of subjects with at least 1 prior birth who presented for a well woman visit in 2019-2020. Charts were reviewed for documentation of a general medical history (hypertension, diabetes, and mood disorders) versus screening for comparable obstetric complications (pre-eclampsia, GDM, and PMADs). The results were compared using the McNemar and chi-square tests as appropriate. Results: In total, 472 encounters were identified, and 137 met the inclusion criteria. Across specialties, clinicians were significantly more likely to document general medical conditions than pregnancy complications, including hypertensive disorders (odds ratio [OR], 2.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18 to 5.48), diabetes (OR, 7.67; 95% CI, 3.27 to 22.0), and mood disorders (OR, 10.5; 95% CI, 3.81 to 40.3). Obstetrics and gynecology providers were more likely to document any pregnancy history (OR, 4.50; 95% CI, 1.24 to 16.27); however, they were not significantly more likely to screen for relevant obstetric complications (OR, 2.49; 95% CI, 0.90 to 6.89). Overall, the rate of pregnancy complication documentation was low in primary care and obstetrics and gynecology clinics (8.8 and 19.0%, respectively). Conclusions: Obstetrics and gynecology providers more frequently documented a pregnancy history than those in primary care; however, the rate was low across specialties, and providers reported screening for clinically relevant complications less frequently than for general medical conditions.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

The views expressed in this manuscript reflect the results of research conducted by the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Navy, Department of the Air Force, Uniformed Services University, Department of Defense, or the United States Government. EDM and AST are military service members and KS and SR are employees of the U.S. Government. This work was prepared as part of their official duties. Title 17 U.S.C. 105 provides that "Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government." Title 17 U.S.C. 101 defines a United States Government work as a work prepared by a military service member or employee of the United States Government as part of that person's official duties.

References

  1. Gestational hypertension and preeclampsia: ACOG practice bulletin, number 222. Obstet Gynecol 2020;135(6):e237-e260. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000003891
  2. Smith GC, Pell JP, Walsh D. Pregnancy complications and maternal risk of ischaemic heart disease: a retrospective cohort study of 129,290 births. Lancet 2001;357(9273):2002-2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(00)05112-6
  3. Ray JG, Vermeulen MJ, Schull MJ, Redelmeier DA. Cardiovascular health after maternal placental syndromes (CHAMPS): population-based retrospective cohort study. Lancet 2005; 366(9499):1797-1803. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67726-4
  4. Brown MC, Best KE, Pearce MS, Waugh J, Robson SC, Bell R. Cardiovascular disease risk in women with pre-eclampsia: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Epidemiol 2013;28(1):1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-013-9762-6
  5. Grandi SM, Vallee-Pouliot K, Reynier P, Eberg M, Platt RW, Arel R, et al. Hypertensive disorders in pregnancy and the risk of subsequent cardiovascular disease. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2017;31(5):412-421. https://doi.org/10.1111/ppe.12388
  6. Brouwers L, van der Meiden-van Roest AJ, Savelkoul C, Vogelvang TE, Lely AT, Franx A, et al. Recurrence of pre-eclampsia and the risk of future hypertension and cardiovascular disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG 2018;125(13):1642-1654. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.15394
  7. ACOG practice bulletin no. 190: gestational diabetes mellitus. Obstet Gynecol 2018;131(2):e49-e64. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000002501
  8. Kim C, Newton KM, Knopp RH. Gestational diabetes and the incidence of type 2 diabetes: a systematic review. Diabetes Care 2002;25(10):1862-1868.
  9. Bellamy L, Casas JP, Hingorani AD, Williams D. Type 2 diabetes mellitus after gestational diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2009;373(9677):1773-1779. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60731-5
  10. Meltzer-Brody S, Stuebe A. The long-term psychiatric and medical prognosis of perinatal mental illness. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2014;28(1):49-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2013.08.009
  11. American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee. 15. Management of diabetes in pregnancy: standards of medical care in diabetes-2022. Diabetes Care 2022;45(Suppl 1):S232-S243. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc22-S015
  12. Mosca L, Benjamin EJ, Berra K, Bezanson JL, Dolor RJ, LloydJones DM, et al. Effectiveness-based guidelines for the prevention of cardiovascular disease in women--2011 update: a guideline from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2011;123(11):1243-1262. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0b013e31820faaf8
  13. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' Task Force on Hypertension in Pregnancy. Hypertension in pregnancy: executive summary. Obstet Gynecol 2013;122(5):1122-1131. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000437382.03963.88
  14. Piepoli MF, Hoes AW, Agewall S, Albus C, Brotons C, Catapano AL, et al. 2016 European Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice: the Sixth Joint Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and other societies on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice (constituted by representatives of 10 societies and by invited experts) developed with the special contribution of the European Association for Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation (EACPR). Eur Heart J 2016;37(29):2315-2381. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehw106
  15. Pascale A, Beal MW, Fitzgerald T. Rethinking the well woman visit: a scoping review to identify eight priority areas for well woman care in the era of the Affordable Care Act. Womens Health Issues 2016;26(2):135-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.whi.2015.11.003
  16. ACOG committee opinion No. 755: well-woman visit. Obstet Gynecol 2018;132(4):e181-e186. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000002897
  17. Phipps MG, Son S, Zahn C, O'Reilly N, Cantor A, Frost J, et al. Women's preventive services initiative's well-woman chart: a summary of preventive health recommendations for women. Obstet Gynecol 2019;134(3):465-469. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000003368
  18. Brener A, Lewnard I, Mackinnon J, Jones C, Lohr N, Konda S, et al. Missed opportunities to prevent cardiovascular disease in women with prior preeclampsia. BMC Womens Health 2020; 20(1):217.
  19. Nagraj S, Hinton L, Praveen D, Kennedy S, Norton R, Hirst J. Women's and healthcare providers' perceptions of long-term complications associated with hypertension and diabetes in pregnancy: a qualitative study. BJOG 2019;126(Suppl 4):34-42. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.15847
  20. Bowman S. Impact of electronic health record systems on information integrity: quality and safety implications. Perspect Health Inf Manag 2013;10(Fall):1c.