obstetricians Archives - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia

  • Original Article

    Screening and prevention of preterm birth: how is it done in clinical practice?

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2024;46:e-rbgo32

    Summary

    Original Article

    Screening and prevention of preterm birth: how is it done in clinical practice?

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2024;46:e-rbgo32

    DOI 10.61622/rbgo/2024rbgo32

    Views250

    Abstract

    Objective:

    To ascertain how screening for preterm birth is performed among obstetricians working in public and private practice in a middle-income country.

    Methods:

    Cross-sectional study of 265 obstetrician-gynecologists employed at public and private facilities. An online questionnaire was administered, with items designed to collect data on prematurity screening and prevention practices.

    Results:

    The mean age of respondents was 44.5 years; 78.5% were female, and 97.7% had completed a medical residency program. Universal screening (i.e., by ultrasound measurement of cervical length) was carried out by only 11.3% of respondents in public practice; 43% request transvaginal ultrasound if the manual exam is abnormal, and 74.6% request it in pregnant women with risk factors for preterm birth. Conversely, 60.7% of respondents in private practice performed universal screening. This difference in screening practices between public and private practice was highly significant (p < 0.001). Nearly all respondents (90.6%) reported prescribing vaginal progesterone for short cervix.

    Conclusion:

    In the setting of this study, universal ultrasound screening to prevent preterm birth was used by just over half of doctors in private practice. In public facilities, screening was even less common. Use of vaginal progesterone in cervical shortening was highly prevalent. There is an unmet need for formal protocols for screening and prevention of preterm birth in middle-income settings.

    See more
  • Original Article

    Interest In and Practices Related to Gynecologic Oncology among Members of the Brazilian Federation of Associations of Gynecology and Obstetrics

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2019;41(6):394-399

    Summary

    Original Article

    Interest In and Practices Related to Gynecologic Oncology among Members of the Brazilian Federation of Associations of Gynecology and Obstetrics

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2019;41(6):394-399

    DOI 10.1055/s-0039-1692467

    Views13

    Abstract

    Objective

    The present study aims to obtain basic demographic information, the level of interest and of training in gynecology oncology among Brazilian obstetricians and gynecologists (OB-GYNs) to create a professional profile.

    Methods

    An online questionnaire was sent to 16,008 gynecologists affiliated to the Brazilian Federation of Associations of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FEBRASGO, in the Portuguese acronym). We considered gynecologists dedicated to gynecologic oncology (OB-GYNs ONCO) those who self-reported that > 50% of their daily practice consists in working with women’s cancer care.

    Results

    A total of 1,608 (10%) of 16,008 FEBRASGO members responded. The OBGYNs are concentrated in the southern and southeastern states of Brazil. Gynecologic oncology was considered the 8th greatest area of interest in gynecology among the OBGYNs. A total of 95 (5.9%) of the OB-GYNs were considered OB-GYNs ONCO. Obstetricians and gynecologists are actively engaged in cancer care: > 60% of them dedicate up to 25% of their daily practice to oncology. The role of the physicians in screening and prevention, diagnosis, in the treatment of precancerous lesions, and in low complexity surgical procedures is notably high. Gynecologists dedicated to gynecologic oncology in Brazil have a heterogeneous, nonstandardized and short training period in gynecologic oncology. These professionals had a more significantly role in performing medium- and high-complexity operations compared with OB-GYNs (65.2% versus 34%, and 47.3% versus 8.4%, respectively).

    Conclusion

    The role of OB-GYNs and of OB-GYNs ONCO appears to be complementary. Obstetricians and gynecologists actmore often in screening and prevention and in low-complexity surgical procedures, whereas OB-GYNs ONCO are more involved in highly complex cases. Strategies to raise standards in cancer training and to encourage the recognition of gynecologic oncology as a subspecialty should be adopted in Brazil.

    See more
    Interest In and Practices Related to Gynecologic Oncology among Members of the Brazilian Federation of Associations of Gynecology and Obstetrics

Search

Search in:

Article type
abstract
book-review
brief-report
case-report
correction
editorial
letter
other
rapid-communication
research-article
review-article
Section
Arigos Originais
Article
Artigo de Revisão
Original Articles
Carta ao Editor
Carta ao Editor
Cartas
Case Report
Case Reports
Caso e Tratamento
Clinical Consensus Recommendation
Corrigendum
Editoriais
Editorial
Equipamentos e Métodos
Errata
Erratas
Erratum
FEBRASGO POSITION STATEMENT
Febrasgo Statement
Febrasgo Statement Position
FIGO Statement
GUIDELINES
Integrative Review
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Métodos e Técnicas
Nota do Editor
Nota Prévia
Original Article
Original Article/Contraception
Original Article/Infertility
Original Article/Obstetrics
Original Article/Oncology
Original Article/Sexual Violence/Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology
Original Article/Teaching and Training
Original Articles
Relato de Caso
Relato de Casos
Relatos de Casos
Reply to the Letter to the Editor
Resposta dos Autores
Resumo De Tese
Resumos de Tese
Resumos de Teses
Resumos dos Trabalhos Premiados no 50º Congresso Brasileiro de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
Review
Review Article
Review Articles
Revisão
Short Communication
Special Article
Systematic Review
Técnica e Equipamentos
Técnicas e Equipamentos
Técnicas e Métodos
Trabalhos Originais
Year / Volume
2024; v.46
2023; v.45
2022; v.44
2021; v.43
2020; v.42
2019; v.41
2018; v.40
2017; v.39
2016; v.38
2015; v.37
2014; v.36
2013; v.35
2012; v.34
2011; v.33
2010; v.32
2009; v.31
2008; v.30
2007; v.29
2006; v.28
2005; v.27
2004; v.26
2003; v.25
2002; v.24
2001; v.23
2000; v.22
1999; v.21
1998; v.20
ISSUE