Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research article

Two sides of the same coin – an interview study of Swedish obstetricians’ experiences using ultrasound in pregnancy management

Authors: Annika Åhman, Margareta Persson, Kristina Edvardsson, Ann Lalos, Sophie Graner, Rhonda Small, Ingrid Mogren

Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The extended use of ultrasound that is seen in maternity care in most Western countries has not only affected obstetric care but also impacted on the conception of the fetus in relation to the pregnant woman. This situation has also raised concerns regarding the pregnant woman’s reproductive freedom. The purpose of this study was to explore Swedish obstetricians’ experiences and views on the role of obstetric ultrasound particularly in relation to clinical management of complicated pregnancy, and in relation to situations where the interests of maternal and fetal health conflict.

Methods

A qualitative study design was applied, and data were collected in 2013 through interviews with 11 obstetricians recruited from five different obstetric clinics in Sweden. Data were analysed using qualitative content analysis.

Results

The theme that emerged in the analysis ‘Two sides of the same coin’ depicts the view of obstetric ultrasound as a very important tool in obstetric care while it also was experienced as having given rise to new and challenging issues in the management of pregnancy. This theme was built on three categories: I. Ultrasound is essential and also demanding; II. A woman’s health interest is prioritised in theory, but not always in practice; and III. Ultrasound is rewarding but may also cause unwarranted anxiety.

Conclusions

The widespread use of ultrasound in obstetric care has entailed new challenges for clinicians due to enhanced possibilities to diagnose and treat fetal conditions, which in turn might conflict with the health interests of the pregnant woman. There is a need for further ethical discussions regarding the obstetrician’s position in management of situations where maternal and fetal health interests conflict. The continuing advances in the potential of ultrasound to impact on pregnancy management will also increase the need for adequate and appropriate information and counselling. Together with other health care professionals, obstetricians therefore need to develop improved ways of enabling pregnant women and their partners to make informed decisions regarding pregnancy management.
Literature
1.
Stanton K, Mwanri L. Global Maternal and Child Health Outcomes: the role of obstetric ultrasound in low resource settings. J Prev Med. 2013;1(3):22–9.
2.
Kongnyuy EJ, van den Broek N. The use of ultrasonography in obstetrics in developing countries. Trop Doct. 2007;37(2):70–2.PubMed
3.
Garcia J, Bricker L, Henderson J, Martin MA, Mugford M, Nielson J, et al. Women’s views of pregnancy ultrasound: a systematic review. Birth. 2002;29(4):225–50.PubMed
4.
Makhlouf M, Saade G. Should second trimester ultrasound be routine for all pregnancies? Semin Perinatol. 2013;37(5):323–6.PubMed
5.
Alfirevic Z, Stampalija T, Gyte G. Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;11:CD007529.PubMed
6.
Whitworth M, Bricker L, Neilson J, Dowswell T. Ultrasound for fetal assessment in early pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;4:CD007058.PubMed
7.
Georgsson Ohman S, Waldenstrom U. Second-trimester routine ultrasound screening: expectations and experiences in a nationwide Swedish sample. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008;32(1):15–22.PubMed
8.
Molander E, Alehagen S, Bertero C. Routine ultrasound examination during pregnancy: a world of possibilities. Midwifery. 2010;26(1):18–26.PubMed
9.
Ekelin M, Crang-Svalenius E, Dykes AK. A qualitative study of mothers’ and fathers’ experiences of routine ultrasound examination in Sweden. Midwifery. 2004;20(4):335–44.PubMed
10.
Eurenius K, Axelsson O, Gällstedt-Fransson I, Sjöden P-O. Perception of information, expectations and experiences among women and their partners attending a second-trimester routine ultrasound scan. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1997;9:86–90.PubMed
11.
Fenwick J, Bayes S, Johansson M. A qualitative investigation into the pregnancy experiences and childbirth expectations of Australian fathers-to-be. Sex Reprod Healthc. 2012;3(1):3–9.PubMed
12.
Harpel TS. Fear of the unknown: ultrasound and anxiety about fetal health. Health. 2008;12(3):295–312.PubMed
13.
Thorup TJ, Zingenberg H. Use of ‘non-medical’ ultrasound imaging before mid-pregnancy in Copenhagen. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2015;94(1):102–5.PubMed
14.
Zechmeister I. Foetal images: the power of visual technology in antenatal care and the implications for women’s reproductive freedom. Health Care Anal. 2001;9(4):387–400.PubMed
15.
Fasouliotis SJ, Schenker JG. Maternal–fetal conflict. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2000;89(1):101–7.PubMed
16.
Deprest JA, Devlieger R, Srisupundit K, Beck V, Sandaite I, Rusconi S, et al. Fetal surgery is a clinical reality. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2010;15(1):58–67.PubMed
17.
18.
Andersson-Ellström A. Mödrahälsovård, sexuell och reproduktiv hälsa [Antenatal Care, Sexual and Reproductive Health]. Stockholm: Svensk Förening för Obstetrik och Gynecologi; 2008.
19.
Ferm Widlund K, Gunnarsson C, Nordin K, Hansson MG. Pregnant women are satisfied with the information they receive about prenatal diagnosis, but are their decisions well informed? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2009;88(10):1128–32.PubMed
20.
Elo S, Kyngas H. The qualitative content analysis process. J Adv Nurs. 2008;62(1):107–15.PubMed
21.
22.
Cook RJ. International human rights and women’s reproductive health. Stud Fam Plann. 1993;24(2):73–86.PubMed
23.
McLean SAM. The moral and legal boundaries of fetal intervention: whose right/whose duty. Semin Neonatol. 1998;3(4):249–54.
24.
Leung JLY, Pang SMC. Ethical analysis of non-medical fetal ultrasound. Nurs Ethics. 2009;16(5):637–46.PubMed
25.
McNay M, Fleming JE. Forty years of obstetric ultrasound 1957-1997: from A-scope to three dimensions. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1999;25(1):3–56.PubMed
26.
van Bogaert L-J, Dhai A. Ethical challenges of treating the critically ill pregnant patient. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2008;22(5):983–96.PubMed
27.
Kvande L. From politics to ethics--obstetric ultrasound in 1980's and 1990's. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2008;128(24):2855-2859.
28.
Women, reproductive health and international human right. Prog Hum Reprod Res. 1999;50:2-4.
29.
Edvardsson K, Small R, Persson M, Lalos A, Mogren I. Ultrasound is an invaluable third eye, but it can’t see everything: a qualitative study with obstetricians in Australia. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014;14(1):363.PubMedPubMedCentral
30.
Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today. 2004;24(2):105–12.PubMed
31.
Minkoff H, Marshall MF, Liaschenko J. The Fetus, the “Potential Child”, and the Ethical Obligations of Obstetricians. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(5):1100–3.PubMed
32.
Rink BD. Maternal-fetal care starts and ends with the mother. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(5):374–5.PubMed
33.
Davis AS, Chock VY, Hintz SR. Fetal centers and the role of the neonatologist in complex fetal care. Am J Perinatol. 2014;31(07):549–56.PubMed
34.
Brown SD, Ecker JL, Ward JRM, Halpern EF, Sayeed SA, Buchmiller TL, et al. Prenatally diagnosed fetal conditions in the age of fetal care: does who counsels matter? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(5):409.e401–11.
35.
Brown SD, Donelan K, Martins Y, Sayeed SA, Mitchell C, Buchmiller TL, et al. Does professional orientation predict ethical sensitivities? Attitudes of paediatric and obstetric specialists toward fetuses, pregnant women and pregnancy termination. Reproductive ethics. J Med Ethics. 2014;40:117–22.PubMed
36.
Åhman A, Runestam K, Sarkadi A. Did I really want to know this? Pregnant women’s reaction to detection of a soft marker during ultrasound screening. Patient Educ Couns. 2010;81(1):87–93.PubMed
37.
Åhman A, Lindgren P, Sarkadi A. Facts first, then reaction—Expectant fathers’ experiences of an ultrasound screening identifying soft markers. Midwifery. 2012;28(5):e667–75.PubMed
38.
Mensah YB, Nkyekyer K, Mensah K. The Ghanaian woman’s experience and perception of ultrasound use in antenatal care. Ghana Med J. 2014;48(1):31–8.PubMedPubMedCentral
39.
Lalor J, Devane D. Information, knowledge and expectations of the routine ultrasound scan. Midwifery. 2007;23(1):13–22.PubMed
40.
Hayat Roshanai A, Ingvoldstad C, Lindgren P. Fetal ultrasound examination and assessment of genetic soft markers in Sweden: are ethical principles respected? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2015;94(2):141–7.PubMed
41.
Sandelowski M. Channel of desire: fetal ultrasonography in two user-context. Qual Health Res. 1994;4:262–80.
42.
Yeo G, Lim ML. Maternal and fetal best interests in day-to-day obstetrics. Ann Acad Med Singap. 2011;40(1):43–9.PubMed
43.
Vlemmix F, Warendorf JK, Rosman AN, Kok M, Mol BWJ, Morris JM, et al. Decision aids to improve informed decision-making in pregnancy care: a systematic review. BJOG. 2013;120(3):257–66.PubMed
44.
Elwyn G, Rix A, Holt T, Jones D. Why do clinicians not refer patients to online decision support tools? Interviews with front line clinics in the NHS. BMJ Open 2012, 2(6). doi:10.​1136/​bmjopen-2012-001530.
45.
Lawson KL, Pierson RA. J obstet gynaecol canmaternal decisions regarding prenatal diagnosis: rational choices or sensible decisions? J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2007;29(3):240–6.PubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Two sides of the same coin – an interview study of Swedish obstetricians’ experiences using ultrasound in pregnancy management
Authors
Annika Åhman
Margareta Persson
Kristina Edvardsson
Ann Lalos
Sophie Graner
Rhonda Small
Ingrid Mogren
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2393
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-015-0743-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 1/2015 Go to the issue

Research article

Knowledge on preconceptional folic acid supplementation and intention to seek for preconception care among men and women in an urban city: a population-based cross-sectional study

Research article

Adverse pregnancy outcomes in rural Uganda (1996–2013): trends and associated factors from serial cross sectional surveys

Research article

The relationship of women’s status and empowerment with skilled birth attendant use in Senegal and Tanzania

Research article

Barriers to antenatal care use in Nigeria: evidences from non-users and implications for maternal health programming

Research article

Biomarkers of nutrition and stress in pregnant women with a history of eating disorders in relation to head circumference and neurocognitive function of the offspring

Research article

Preeclampsia and associated factors among pregnant women attending antenatal care in Dessie referral hospital, Northeast Ethiopia: a hospital-based study