Maternal-fetal Medicine Fellows Research Articles

Quality Improvement Through Nurse-initiated Kaiser Sepsis Calculator at a County Hospital.

Suspected early onset sepsis drives most antibiotic use in the newborn nursery. The Kaiser Sepsis Calculator (KSC) is a validated tool that safely decreases laboratory evaluation and antibiotic administration in infants aged ≥34 weeks. Our quality improvement aim was a nurse-initiated, KSC-based program to decrease blood cultures (BCx) and complete blood counts (CBC) by 10% from March 2021 to October 2021 among chorioamnionitis-exposed infants born ≥35 weeks' gestation. A secondary aim was to decrease antibiotic administration by 10%. The KSC was implemented for infants at University Health, a county hospital affiliate of the University of Texas Health Science Center San Antonio, with a level I nursery and level IV NICU. The multidisciplinary project included pediatric hospitalists, neonatologists, family practitioners, maternal-fetal medicine physicians, fellows, residents, and nurses. All infants born 6 months before (August 2020-January 2021) and 7 months after protocol implementation (March 2021-September 2021) were analyzed. A total of 53 chorioamnionitis-exposed infants were included from the preintervention period and 51 from the postintervention period. CBC utilization decreased from 96% to 27%, BCx utilization decreased from 98% to 37%, and antibiotic utilization fell from 25% to 16%. In no cases were antibiotics prescribed against the KSC, and to our knowledge, no early onset sepsis diagnoses or infection-related hospital readmissions were missed. The multidisciplinary implementation of the KSC led to a reduction in testing, exceeding our initial goal. A nurse-initiated protocol reduced BCx, CBC, and antibiotic utilization among chorioamnionitis-exposed infants.

Incidentally Found Midtrimester Shortened Cervical Length: Practice Patterns among American Maternal-Fetal Medicine Specialists.

The management of incidentally found short cervical length (CL) without prior spontaneous preterm birth (PTB) can vary. While most agree on starting vaginal progesterone, management after CL shortens <10 mm varies. The purpose of this study was to elucidate current practice patterns amongst maternal-fetal medicine (MFM) specialists. We conducted an online survey of MFM attending physicians and fellows in the United States from May 2019 to April 2020. The primary outcome was management of varying CL based on gestational age. Variations in management were assessed descriptively. There were 236 respondents out of 400 eligible surveyed, with a response rate of 59.2%. Universal CL screening was reported by 93.6% (49.6% abdominal and 44.1% transvaginal). Management of short CL varied based on CL measurement, rather than gestational age at presentation. At CL <10 mm, management included cerclage (17.4-18.7%), vaginal progesterone (41.3-41.7%), or cerclage plus vaginal progesterone (43.4%). Between CL of 10 to 20 mm, the majority (77.4-91.9%) would start vaginal progesterone. At CL 21 to 25 mm, management varied between expectant management (45.5-48.5%) or vaginal progesterone (51.1-52.8%). Suture material used was ethylene terephthalate (47.4%) or polypropelene (31.2). Preoperative antibiotic use was reported by 22.3%, while 45.5% used them only if the amniotic membranes were exposed, and 32.2% reported no antibiotic use. Postoperative tocolytic use varied with 19.3% reporting no use, 32.6% using it always, 8.2% only after significant cervical manipulation, 22.7% after the patient is experiencing symptoms, and 17.6% using it only if the cervix is dilated on exam. After cerclage placement, 44.5% continued CL surveillance. Substantial differences of opinion exist among MFM physicians regarding management of incidentally found short CL in patients without history of PTB. The differences in responses obtained highlight the need for evidence-based guidelines for managing this clinical scenario. · There is lack of consensus on the management of incidentally found shortened CL.. · The purpose of this study was to elucidate current trends in CL screening and management.. · Substantial differences of opinion exist regarding management of incidentally found short CL..

Curriculum and competency assessment program for training maternal-fetal medicine fellows in the performance of the detailed obstetric ultrasound examination: A consensus report

In 2018, a multidisciplinary task force published a consensus report outlining an ultrasound curriculum and competency assessment tool for use in obstetric and gynecologic residency programs.1 This document outlined the rationale for standardized ultrasound training among residents, citing both the integral role of ultrasound in the clinical practice of obstetrics and gynecology and the need for formal educational strategies and competency assessments in light of resident work hour restrictions.

Group B Streptococcus Screening and Treatment Adherence in Pregnancy: A Retrospective Cohort Study and Opportunities for Improvement

Pregnancy is a time of increased healthcare screening, and past adherence to evolving guidelines informs best practices. Although studies of Group B Streptococcus guideline adherence have focused primarily on treatment of Group B Streptococcus carriers, this study broadly evaluated long-term adherence to both Group B Streptococcus screening and treatment guidelines. Adherence was evaluated across provider types (obstetrics and gynecology, certified nurse midwives, and family medicine). We conducted a retrospective cohort study. Demographic and clinical information were extracted from all prenatal care and delivery patients at a single institution in a single year. Vancomycin prescriptions in pregnancy were tracked for 10 years to determine long-term adherence. Adherence was defined as no deviation from 2010 Group B Streptococcus screening and treatment guidelines. Adherence occurred in 89% (1,610/1,810) of patients. Reasons for deviations from guidelines could not always be determined. There was no significant difference in maternal age, race, prenatal provider type, provider type at delivery, gestational age at delivery, delivery mode, or whether antibiotic sensitivities were performed between compliant and noncompliant groups. Significant differences in adherence were found between obstetric clinics (high-risk obstetrics clinic, maternal‒fetal medicine fellows clinic, continuity of care clinic, and faculty private clinic) (p<0.0001) and between the faculty family medicine clinic and resident family medicine clinic (p=0.001). Vancomycin prescription practice did not change significantly over the10-year period. High rates of adherence to Group B Streptococcus screening and treatment guidelines in pregnancy have positive implications for reducing antibiotic resistance. Given evolving guidelines, there is a need to periodically evaluate adherence and to re-educate providers about standard practices and best documentation practices.

Maternal–fetal medicine fellowship program director perspective on virtual interviews following matriculation of the first virtual interview class

The first class of virtually interviewed maternal-fetal medicine fellows has matriculated into their training programs. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of virtual interviews on the outcomes of the National Resident Matching Program within our subspecialty. We assessed maternal-fetal medicine fellowship program directors' experience with their fellows who interviewed virtually as compared with experience with the previous year's fellows who interviewed in-person. In addition, we evaluated program directors' satisfaction with the virtual interview process and their preferred mode of interviewing for future cycles. A cross-sectional online survey was distributed through the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine to all maternal-fetal medicine fellowship program directors on October 26, 2021, approximately 4 months after the first virtually interviewed fellow matriculated into the training program. Program directors were asked to provide information about their National Resident Matching Program rank list between their final in-person and first virtual years. Program directors were asked to evaluate their experience with their fellow 4 months into the first year of fellowship compared with their expectations based on their virtual interview, and their experience at that same point in fellowship of their last fellow who interviewed in-person. For all questions, in programs with >1 fellow per year, program directors were asked to answer the questions for the fellow ranked highest on their National Resident Matching Program rank list for each year. Survey data were collected anonymously and stored securely. Descriptive statistics and bivariate analyses were performed to compare groups, all tests were 2-sided, and the significance level was set at P<.05. A total of 80 of 98 (81.6%) program directors responded. There was no difference in the position of the matched fellow on the program's National Resident Matching Program rank list between candidates interviewed in-person and candidates interviewed virtually. There was also no difference in the number of programs that took an internal or external candidate outside of the National Resident Matching Program match process or that did not fill their fellowship positions. Program directors reported no difference between fellows interviewed virtually and those interviewed in-person in meeting interview-based performance expectations with regard to clinical capabilities (P=.67), technical skills (P=.96), research potential or experience (P=.54), professionalism and ability to be a team player (P=.72), and compatibility with the division and fellowship program (P=.67). Program directors' overall experience with virtual interviews was favorable: 70 (95.8%) program directors reported that the virtual interview experience was better than expected, slightly better than expected, or as expected. In future years, most program directors favored ongoing exclusively virtual interviewing (n=41; 56.2%) or a hybrid of virtual and in-person interviews (n=27; 37.0%). Only 5 (6.9%) reported a desire to return to exclusively in-person interviewing. Maternal-fetal medicine fellowship program directors did not identify a difference in National Resident Matching Program results between fellows interviewed virtually and those interviewed in-person. Furthermore, there was no difference between these fellows in meeting interview-based expectations in the first year of the training program. Most program directors found the virtual interview process to be effective and support ongoing virtual interviews.

Cervical Length Ultrasound for the Evaluation of Preterm Labor: A Survey of National Use and Review of Evidence.

The objective of this study was to survey national utilization of cervical length (CL) ultrasound on labor and delivery (L&D) for the evaluation of preterm labor (PTL) and identify provider attitudes and barriers to utilization. Survey was emailed to Obstetrics and Gynecology Residency and Maternal-Fetal Medicine Fellowship program and advertised via links on obstetric-related Facebook interest groups. The survey was open from August 4, 2020 to January 4, 2021. Characteristics between respondents who did and did not report the use of CL ultrasound for PTL evaluation were compared with chi-square analysis. There were 214 respondents across 42 states. One hundred and thirty-four respondents (63%) reported any use of CL in the evaluation of PTL and eighty (37%) denied it. There was a significant difference in practice location, practice type, delivery volume, and region between those who did and did not utilize CL ultrasound on L&D. Those who did use CL ultrasound were more likely to report no barriers to use (40 vs. 4%, p < 0.001). The most common barriers involved the availability of transvaginal ultrasound (31%), sterilization of transvaginal ultrasound probe (32%), limited availability of persons able to perform/interpret CL imaging (38%). Nineteen percent believed CL ultrasound had little/no utility in clinical practice. Those who did not use CL ultrasound in the evaluation of PTL were significantly more likely to report the feeling that there was little/no utility of CL ultrasound in clinical practice (37 vs. 7%, p < 0.001) and to report transvaginal ultrasound availability as barriers to use (63 vs. 12%, p < 0.001). CL ultrasound is used nationally in PTL evaluation. However, significant barriers limit widespread adoption. These barriers can be addressed through the dissemination of information and practice guidelines, addition of CL ultrasound education in residency training and through CME opportunities after training, and providing support/resources/access for those looking to add this tool to their practice environment. · In a national survey, 63% of obstetricians endorsed any use of cervical length (CL) ultrasound for preterm labor evaluation on labor and delivery.. · The most common barriers involved the availability of transvaginal ultrasound (31%), sterilization of transvaginal ultrasound probe (32%), limited availability of persons able to perform/interpret CL imaging (38%).. · Those who did not use CL ultrasound in the evaluation of PTL were significantly more likely to report the feeling that there was little/no utility of CL ultrasound in clinical practice and to report transvaginal ultrasound availability as barriers to utilization.. · Barriers to utilization of CL ultrasound for preterm labor evaluation can be addressed through practice guidelines, ultrasound education, and support for equipment/training necessary for use..

Bereavement Support for Siblings after Neonatal Loss: an Online Survey of U.S. Training Centers.

The aim of this study was to examine bereavement support for siblings of patients who die in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) given the adverse effects of unprocessed grief and the paucity of information on children whose newborn siblings die STUDY DESIGN: This was an anonymous online original survey assessing pre-COVID-19 pandemic bereavement services for NICU families, clinicians' attitudes toward support interventions, challenges, and center characteristics. In spring 2020, nurse managers at 81 U.S. centers with neonatology and maternal-fetal medicine fellowship programs were asked to identify the individual most knowledgeable in their NICU's bereavement support services; these individuals were invited by email to complete an original online survey. Chi testing and odds ratios (ORs) compared responses from centers reporting involvement of palliative care teams (PCT) in NICU sibling bereavement versus no PCT. Fifty-six percent (45 of 80) of invitees responded. Most (77%) NICUs permitted perimortem sibling visitation. Challenges included sparse community resources and limited direct sibling contact. Sixty-nine percent (n = 31) of centers were grouped as PCT. PCT respondents reported eightfold higher chances of providing direct education to the sibling (OR, 7.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-34; p = 0.01). Views on appropriateness of sharing educational information with extended family, babysitters, and teachers did not differ. While notifying pediatricians of families experiencing NICU death was more common in PCT (p = 0.02), most respondents reported having "no individual responsible for such communications" (52% PCT vs. 100%, p = 0.001). Despite limited direct contact with siblings of NICU patients who die, efforts are made to involve them in bereavement activities. Opportunities to support these children were identified. Where available, palliative care teams can help provide bereaved siblings with direct education. We recommend formalizing communication mechanisms to ensure that if a NICU patient dies and has surviving siblings, the outpatient physicians caring for these siblings are informed. · Palliative care enhanced sibling support.. · Resource and visitation limits hinder support.. · Teams sporadically briefed siblings' physicians..

Hands-on Simulation Workshop for Obstetric Ultrasound-Guided Invasive Procedures.

IntroductionDue to the introduction of cell-free DNA genetic testing options, the number of clinical ultrasound procedures has greatly diminished in recent years. With fewer real-life ultrasound-guided procedures being performed, it is difficult for OB/GYN and maternal-fetal medicine (MFM) trainees to achieve competency in doing them. Simulation can be utilized to address this issue and supplement a learner's real-life training.MethodsWe developed a simulation workshop incorporating previously described ultrasound guidance task trainers and simulators of amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling. The workshop had three parts: needle guidance basics, targeting task performance, and procedure-specific simulation. A form of this workshop has been held at the annual meeting of the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine since 2015 and as a regional course for MFM fellows since 2017. During the 2019 and 2020 courses, participants completed Likert-scale surveys evaluating the course.ResultsSince the workshops began in 2015, approximately 300 people have participated. In 2019–2020, 41 MFM attending physicians, 136 MFM fellows, and three OB/GYN residents took our course and completed a postcourse survey. Participants rated the course highly and thought it was highly effective.DiscussionWe created an introductory simulation workshop for obstetric ultrasound-guided invasive procedures that participants rated highly and thought was very effective. Objective clinical assessment of skill improvement after completion of this course is needed to verify its true impact. Repeated exposure to this introductory simulation and creation of more challenging workshops are needed to achieve a sustained high level of procedural skill.

Maternal-fetal medicine fellows’ perception and comfort with obstetrical ultrasound and prenatal diagnosis

Ultrasound training is a vital component of maternal-fetal medicine fellowships in the United States. Of the 18 months of core clinical training, the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology currently requires a minimum of 3 months to be dedicated to ultrasound to be eligible for board certification. However, the experience and degree of hands-on training differ among the fellowship programs and have not been reassessed for nearly a decade. To assess regional heterogeneity in the ultrasound training experience during maternal-fetal medicine fellowship in the United States. A survey was distributed to postgraduate year (PGY)-6 maternal-fetal medicine fellows registered to attend an annual ultrasound training course before the conference (n=114). For programs with >1 fellow attending (n=39), only 1 of them completed the survey to represent the program. The questions included demographics of the program, ultrasound training structure, the fellows' self-perception of ultrasound capabilities, research, mentorship, and technical aspects of sonography. Seventy two postgraduate year 6 fellows with a wide geographic distribution as follows completed the survey (96% response rate): 10 (14%) from the West, 16 (22%) from the Midwest, 17 (24%) from the South, and 29 (40%) from the Northeast. Respondents undergoing training in the South were less likely to report feeling comfortable performing nuchal translucency and detailed anatomic surveys than those from other regions (nuchal translucency: P=.046; anatomy: P=.011). Most of the respondents reported feeling comfortable performing growth (78%) and umbilical artery Doppler (58%) and feeling uncomfortable with three-dimensional ultrasound, neurosonography, and fetal echocardiography. Respondents in the Northeast were more likely to report feeling comfortable performing chorionic villus sampling (P=.001). There was no difference among fellowship programs in the presence or absence of ultrasound curriculum, bedside teaching, ultrasound-focused research mentorship, or months of ultrasound training. Despite the standardization of ultrasound training structure across the United States, there remains regional heterogeneity in fellow self-reported comfort with specific ultrasound techniques and chorionic villus sampling at a midpoint in their fellowship training. The maternal-fetal medicine attending involvement at the bedside did not affect the fellow self-reported comfort with ultrasound surveys. This study highlights the need for further optimization of maternal-fetal medicine fellowship ultrasound training, especially in advanced sonography and diagnostic procedures.

How do Clinicians View the Process of Shared Decision-Making with Parents Facing Extremely Early Deliveries? Results from an Online Survey.

The objective of this study was to better understand how neonatology (Neo) and maternal-fetal medicine (MFM) physicians approach the process of shared decision-making (SDM) with parents facing extremely premature (<25 weeks estimated gestational age) delivery during antenatal counseling. Attending physicians at U.S. centers with both Neo and MFM fellowships were invited to answer an original online survey about antenatal counseling for extremely early newborns. Preferences for conveying information are reported elsewhere. Here, we report clinicians' self-assessments of their ability to engage in deliberations and decision-making and perceptions of what is important to parents in the SDM process. Multivariable logistic regression analyzed respondents' views with respect to individual characteristics, such as specialty, gender, and years of clinical experience. In total, 74 MFMs and 167 Neos representing 94% of the 81 centers surveyed responded. Neos versus MFMs reported repeat visits with parents less often (<0.001) and agreed that parents were more likely to have made delivery room decisions before they counseled them less often (p < 0.001). Respondents reported regularly achieving most goals of SDM, with the exception of providing spiritual support. Most respondents reported that spiritual and religious views, risk to an infant's survival, and the infant's quality of life were important to parental decision-making, while a physician's own personal choice and family political views were reported as less important. While many barriers to SDM exist, respondents rated language barriers and family views that differ from those of a provider as the most difficult barriers to overcome. This study provides insights into how consultants from different specialties and demographic groups facilitate SDM, thereby informing future efforts for improving counseling and engaging in SDM with parents facing extremely early deliveries and supporting evidence-based training for these complex communication skills. · Perceptions differed by specialty and demographics.. · Parents' spiritual needs were infrequently met.. · Barriers to shared decision-making exist..

Diversity Elements on Maternal Fetal Medicine Fellowship Websites: Opportunity for Improvement in Recruitment and Representation

To analyze Maternal Fetal Medicine (MFM) fellowship websites for presence of diversity elements important to underrepresented minorities in medicine (URIM).[1] [1] Underrepresented in medicine definition. AAMC. https://www.aamc.org/what-we-do/equity-diversity-inclusion/underrepresented-in-medicine. Accessed August 1, 2021. Fellowship websites (Society for MFM) were accessed summer of 2021. We identified 12 website elements that demonstrate commitment to diversity: 1) nondiscrimination statement; 2) diversity and inclusion message; 3) diversity specific language; 4) resources for trainees; 5) community demographics; 6-7) personalized biographies of faculty or fellows; 8-9) individual photographs of faculty or fellows; 10) photos or biographies of alumni; 11) diversity publications and; 12) department statistics. Program size, region, and location were collected. Self-reported URIM data on obstetrics programs was extracted from the National GME Survey 2019. Programs were dichotomized into 6+ diversity elements. Nonparametric, chi-square and Fisher’s exact were used. MFM fellowship programs (excluded military/fetal surgery) were analyzed (n = 91/94). Websites included a mean of 4.1± 2.5 diversity elements. Most (n =75, 82.4%) featured < 6 elements. When dichotomized to 6+ diversity elements, larger faculty size was the only significant factor (p=0.01). The majority had < 12 faculty listed (n=54, 59.3%). For programs with 12+ faculty, 68.8% (n=11/16) demonstrated 6+ diversity elements. Faculty photos, fellow photos, and diversity publications were the most common (92.4%, 68.1%, 49.5% respectively). Mean rate of URIM was 18.8% ± 11.3 and no significant associations were noted. There was a trend for more diversity elements in the Western United States, with a mean of 5.3 ± 2.2, compared to 3.7 ± 2.0 in the South (p=0.24, see Figure). Fellowship websites convey information for trainees, especially in an era of virtual recruitment. This study highlights opportunities for directed improvements to increase recruitment of URIM.

Feasibility and learning curve of performing first trimester fetal anatomy screening among operators with varying experience using the protocol of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG)

Objective To compare the feasibility of performing a complete first trimester fetal anatomy screening between two operators with different levels of experience using the protocol of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG), and to compare the duration of scan and learning curve of each operator as secondary outcomes. Methods A prospective study was conducted on singleton pregnancies at 11+0–13+6 weeks of gestation. Transabdominal ultrasound anatomy screening was performed by a maternal fetal medicine (MFM) staff (operator 1) or a first year MFM fellow (operator 2) following ISUOG guidelines. The visibility of fetal structures and time taken by each operator were recorded and analyzed. Results Data from 98 participants in operator 1 group and 96 participants in operator 2 group were analyzed. The success rate of visualizing all structures was feasible in 87.8% and 91.7% (p = .370) of cases in operator 1 and operator 2, respectively. The significant improvement in visualization success rate was observed between the first 50 and the last 50 scans in both groups (p = .004 vs. p = .006). Average time spent on the exam by operator 1 was significantly shorter than the time spent by operator 2 (11.3 ± 4.8 min vs. 15.0 ± 6.2 min; p < .001). Conclusion Completeness of first trimester fetal anatomy screening following ISUOG protocol were feasible with no statistical difference between the two different levels of experienced operators. Moreover, time allocatable with a brief learning curve were demonstrated in both groups.

Physician Perceptions on Quality of Life and Resuscitation Preferences for Extremely Early Newborns.

The study aimed to explore physician views on whether extremely early newborns will have an acceptable quality of life (QOL), and if these views are associated with physician resuscitation preferences. We performed a cross-sectional survey of neonatologists and maternal fetal medicine (MFM) attendings, fellows, and residents at four U.S. medical centers exploring physician views on future QOL of extremely early newborns and physician resuscitation preferences. Mixed-effects logistic regression models examined association of perceived QOL and resuscitation preferences when adjusting for specialty, level of training, gender, and experience with ex-premature infants. A total of 254 of 544 (47%) physicians were responded. A minority of physicians had interacted with surviving extremely early newborns when they were ≥3 years old (23% of physicians in pediatrics/neonatology and 6% in obstetrics/MFM). The majority of physicians did not believe an extremely early newborn would have an acceptable QOL at the earliest gestational ages (11% at 22 and 23% at 23 weeks). The majority of physicians (73%) believed that having an extremely preterm infant would have negative effects on the family's QOL. Mixed-effects logistic regression models (odds ratio [OR], 95% confidence interval [CI]) revealed that physicians who believed infants would have an acceptable QOL were less likely to offer comfort care only at 22 (OR: 0.19, 95% CI: 0.05-0.65, p < 0.01) and 23 weeks (OR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.07-0.78, p < 0.02). They were also more likely to offer active treatment only at 24 weeks (OR: 9.66, 95% CI: 2.56-38.87, p < 0.01) and 25 weeks (OR: 19.51, 95% CI: 3.33-126.72, p < 0.01). Physician views of extremely early newborns' future QOL correlated with self-reported resuscitation preferences. Residents and obstetric physicians reported more pessimistic views on QOL. · Views of QOL varied by specialty and level of training.. · Contact with former extremely early newborns was limited.. · QOL views were associated with preferred resuscitation practices..

What Information Do Clinicians Deem Important for Counseling Parents Facing Extremely Early Deliveries?: Results from an Online Survey.

The study aimed to better understand how neonatology and maternal fetal medicine (MFM) physicians convey information during antenatal counseling that requires facilitating shared decision-making with parents facing options of resuscitation versus comfort care after extremely early delivery STUDY DESIGN: Attending physicians at US centers with both Neo and MFM fellowships were invited to answer an original online survey about antenatal counseling for extremely early newborns. The survey assessed information conveyed, processes for facilitating shared decision-making (reported separately), and clinical experiences. Neonatology and MFM responses were compared. Multivariable logistic regression analyzed topics often and seldom discussed by specialty groups with respect to respondents' clinical experience and resuscitation option preferences at different gestational weeks. In total, 74 MFM and 167 neonatologists representing 94% of the 81 centers surveyed responded. Grouped by specialty, respondents were similar in counseling experience and distribution of allowing choices between resuscitation and no resuscitation for delivery at specific weeks of gestational ages. MFM versus neonatology reported similar rates of discussing long-term health and developmental concerns and differed in all other categories of topics. Neonatologists were less likely than MFM to discuss caregiver impacts (odds ratio [OR]: 0.14, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.11-0.18, p < 0.001) and comfort care details (OR: 0.19, 95% CI: 0.15-0.25, p < 0.001). Conversely, neonatology versus MFM respondents more frequently reported "usually" discussing topics pertaining to parenting in the NICU (OR: 1.5, 95% CI: 1.2-1.8, p < 0.001) and those regarding stabilizing interventions in the delivery room (OR: 1.8, 95% CI: 1.4-2.2, p < 0.001). Compared with less-experienced respondents, those with 17 years' or more of clinical experience had greater likelihood in both specialties to say they "usually" discussed otherwise infrequently reported topics pertaining to caregiver impacts. Parents require information to make difficult decisions for their extremely early newborns. Our findings endorse the value of co-consultation by MFM and neonatology clinicians and of trainee education on antenatal consultation education to support these families. · Neonatology versus MFM counselors provide complementary information.. · More experience was linked to discussing some topics.. · Co-consultation and trainee education is supported.. · What information parents value requires study..

Sleep among Obstetrics and Gynecology Trainees: Results from a Yoga-Based Wellness Initiative.

This study aimed to determine the feasibility of using a wrist-based fitness tracking device to assess sleep among Obstetrics and Gynecology (OBGYN) trainees who engaged in a yoga-based wellness program. We also sought to evaluate the effects of yoga on sleep. A quality improvement initiative consisting of an 8-week wellness program of weekly yoga classes, nutrition, and physical challenges was implemented for OBGYN residents and Maternal-Fetal Medicine fellows. The Polar A370 fitness tracker device was provided and synced to the Polar Flow for Coach program for inclusion. Data obtained included total and restful sleep from each night the device were worn. Pre- and post-assessment of the Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) were compared. Linear mixed models were used to estimate and test the effect of yoga on sleep while controlling for on-call shifts. Of the 15 participants who synced their device, 13 (87%) were included for analysis. Sleep data from 572 nights were analyzed. The mean (SD) total sleep was 434.28 (110.03) minutes over the 8 weeks. A minimum of 7 hours (420 minutes) of total sleep occurred 59.3% of the time. After controlling for Friday or Saturday night on-call, those who attended yoga class had a significantly greater total sleep (yoga: 425.14 minutes [41.89], no yoga: 357.33 [43.04] minutes; p = 0.04). There was no significant change in the mean global PSQI score after the program (pre: 5.0 [1.6], post: 5.1 [2.5], p = 0.35). Wearable fitness monitors provide insight into sleep patterns displayed during training and can serve as a tool to identify those who are sleep deprived and assist in the evaluation of trainee wellness. Training programs are encouraged to provide access to yoga and mindfulness interventions to improve sleep and possibly clinical performance. · Yoga improves trainee sleep by approximately 60 minutes.. · Total and restful sleep are reduced during night float rotation.. · Trainees obtained 7 hours of sleep approximately 60% of the time..

Maternal-fetal medicine program director experience of exclusive virtual interviewing during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic necessitated an abrupt transition to exclusive virtual interviewing for maternal-fetal medicine fellowship programs. This study aimed to assess the maternal-fetal medicine fellowship program directors' approaches to exclusive virtual interviews and to obtain program director feedback on the virtual interview experience to guide future interview cycles. A novel cross-sectional online survey was distributed through the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine to program directors after the completion of the interview season, but before the results of the National Resident Matching Program on October 14, 2020. Survey data were collected anonymously and managed using secure Research Electronic Data Capture electronic data capture tools. Overall 71 of 89 program directors (80%) responded. All respondents completed their 2020 interviews 100% virtually. Nearly half of program directors (33 of 68, 49%) interviewed more candidates in 2020 than in 2019. Of those who interviewed more candidates in 2020, the mean number of additional candidates per fellowship position was 5.8 (standard deviation, ±3.8). Almost all program directors reported no (35 of 71, 49%) or minimal (34 of 71, 48%) negative impact of technical difficulties on their virtual interview processes. Most programs structured their interview to a half day (4 hours) or less for the candidates. Many programs were able to adapt their supplemental interview materials and events for the candidates into a virtual format, including a virtual social event hosted by 31 of 71 programs (44%). The virtual social event was most commonly casual and led by current fellows. Ultimately, all program directors reported that the virtual interview experience was as expected or better than expected. However, most program directors felt less able to provide candidates with a comprehensive and accurate representation of their program on a virtual platform compared with their previous in-person experiences (46 of 71 [65%] reported minimally, moderately, or significantly less than in-person). In addition, most program directors felt their ability to get to know candidates and assess their "fit" with the program was less than previous in-person years (44 of 71 [62%] reported minimally, moderately, or significantly less than in-person). In a hypothetical future year without any public health concerns, there were 23 of 71 respondents (32%) who prefer exclusive in-person interviews, 24 of 71 (34%) who prefer exclusive virtual interviews, and 24 of 71 (34%) who prefer a hybrid of virtual and in-person interviews. The virtual interview experience was better than expected for most program directors. However, most program directors felt less able to present their programs and assess the candidates on a virtual platform compared with previous in-person experiences. Despite this, most program directors are interested in at least a component of virtual interviewing in future years. Future efforts are needed to refine the virtual interview process to optimize the experience for program directors and candidates.

Reliability and validity of Midwifery - Obstetrics Collaboration (MOC) scale: A tool to improve collaborative practice

ObjectiveIn recent decades, there has been a call to foster effective collaborative models of practice between midwives and obstetricians/gynecologists (OB/GYNs) in the United States in order to improve clinician satisfaction and outcomes for childbearing women. Currently, there is no existing validated scale that measures the collaboration between obstetricians and midwives on labor and birth units. We sought to develop and validate a Midwifery- Obstetrics Collaboration (MOC) Scale that measures obstetricians’ attitudes towards collaboration between obstetricians and midwives on labor and birth units. DesignValidation study. The items in the questionnaire to be validated were developed de novo by the authors, based on their experiences and expertise in collaborative practice as well as by incorporating key principles of effective collaborative practice documented in the literature. The questionnaire was then piloted among 13 content experts. SettingAnonymous online survey conducted in the United States. ParticipantsWe validated the questionnaire among 471 obstetricians in the United States from Sept 2019 to March 2020. The respondents included general obstetrician and gynecologists (OB/GYN) attendings, OB/GYN hospitalists, maternal fetal medicine (MFM) fellows and MFM attendings who practice on a labor and birth unit in the United States. Measurements and findingsWe performed reliability analysis of the a priori items. We measured concurrent validity with an existing scale that measures inter-professional collaboration between nurses and physicians. We also correlated our scale with concerns for liability when working in a collaborative practice with midwives. Lastly, we measured discriminant validity with a single item burn out scale. The novel MOC Scale demonstrated construct and concurrent validity, and high inter-item reliability (a=0.93). The MOC Scale correlated with concerns about liability (r=0.63, p <0.001) but was not associated with burnout indicating the uniqueness of the new construct. Key conclusionsThe MOC Scale is validated to assess collaboration between obstetricians and midwives on labor and birth units from an obstetrician's perspective Implications for practiceThe MOC Scale can be used as a tool in clinical practice, to assess and foster effective collaboration between obstetricians and midwives from an obstetricians’ perspective especially when used in conjunction with other tools that take into the account the perspectives of midwives and childbearing women.

Effect of virtual interviewing on applicant approach to and perspective of the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Subspecialty Fellowship Match

The 2020 application cycle for the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Specialty Fellowship Match was the first to be exclusively virtual. Our study was designed to compare approaches and perspectives of the MFM fellowship candidates who applied with virtual interviews with those of the current Maternal-Fetal Medicine fellows, who applied with in-person interviews in 2017, 2018, or 2019. A survey was developed by the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Fellowship Affairs Committee to ascertain applicant approaches to and perspectives of the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Fellowship Match and was disseminated after 2020 Maternal-Fetal Medicine interviews ended and completed before Fellowship Match Day. Participants were contacted by means of active Listservs maintained by the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Current fellows were instructed to complete the survey using their experiences on the application cycle in which they successfully matched. Those who elected to participate entered their survey responses through the electronic link; answers were recorded in a secure Research Electronic Data Capture database. Outcomes were compared between those who applied during the virtual 2020 Maternal-Fetal Medicine interview cycle and those that applied during the in-person interview cycles in 2017, 2018, or 2019. Of the 140 completed surveys, 46 people participated in the 2020 Maternal-Fetal Medicine Match and were categorized as "virtual applicants," whereas the remaining 94 people participated in the 2017 (n=28), 2018 (n=33), or 2019 (n=33) Maternal-Fetal Medicine Match and were categorized as "in-person applicants." The overall distribution of number of programs to which each applicant applied differed between groups (P=.02); for example, nearly 75% of virtual applicants applied to at least 25 fellowship programs, compared with less than 50% of in-person applicants. Although the number of interviews received was similar between virtual and in-person applicants, virtual applicants were significantly less likely to cancel scheduled interviews (n=18 [39.1%] vs n=68 [72.3%]; P<.001). There were also differences between virtual and in-person applicants in terms of overall cost of the fellowship intervention process and total days away from work for interviewing (P<.001 for both). In particular, nearly two-thirds of virtual applicants reported spending less than $1000 in the Maternal-Fetal Medicine fellowship application process, compared with the nearly two-thirds of in-person applicants who reported spending more than $5000. Among the 46 virtual applicants, nearly 80% reported the experience was better or slightly better than expected, and none reported the experience was slightly worse or worse than expected. Nearly two-thirds of the virtual applicants reported that, compared with their in-person residency interviews, they received a comparable representation of Maternal-Fetal Medicine fellowship programs and could effectively assess their "fit" during interviews (60.9% and 63.0%, respectively). Only 20% of virtual Maternal-Fetal Medicine applicants would recommend returning to exclusive in-person interviews should that be possible in future Maternal-Fetal Medicine matches. Virtual Maternal-Fetal Medicine fellowship interviewing was viewed favorably by applicants but corresponded with significant changes to their application approaches. The differences between virtual and in-person fellowship applicant tendencies identified in this study should inform next year's application cycle for Maternal-Fetal Medicine and possibly other obstetrics and gynecology subspecialty fellowships.

128 Fellowship exposure to management strategies for placenta accreta spectrum

To determine exposure of Maternal-Fetal Medicine (MFM) and Gynecologic Oncology (GO) fellows to alternative management strategies for placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) across the United States. A REDCap survey was sent by email to program directors (PD) of all ABOG-approved MFM and GO fellowships. Responses were anonymous unless participants elected to include contact information. From returned surveys we collected demographic information, including program location, fellowship type, and protocol for managing PAS. Clinical questions about multidisciplinary team involvement, surgical approaches, and considerations for PAS were included. Descriptive statistics were performed. Surveys were emailed to PD at 85 MFM and 61 GO programs . We received 69 complete responses representing 45 MFM (65%) and 24 GO (35%) programs from all regions of the United States (Table 1). All PD reported that fellows have an inpatient role. Most indicated that multidisciplinary team involvement occurs for suspected PAS (99%), with Anesthesiology, Urology, OB/GYN Specialist, Radiology, and Transfusion Medicine being the most common collaborating services. Overall, 27 (39%) PD indicated that their practice offers alternative strategies for management of PAS. This includes 20 (29%) who perform delayed hysterectomy and 7 (12%) who offer a conservative strategy of expectant management rather than hysterectomy. The majority of programs perform immediate hysterectomy for all PAS cases (40, 57%). Regional variation was noted with programs on the east coast more likely to offer alternative management strategies. Clinical approaches to PAS differ across the United States with regional variation. MFM and GO fellows are involved in the care of these patients, but their clinical exposure to various management strategies depends on training institution, and over 40% will likely not gain exposure to alternative strategies such as conservative management or delayed hysterectomy during fellowship.

352 Regional heterogeneity in ultrasound and procedural training in maternal-fetal medicine fellowship: a cross-sectional survey

To assess the current maternal-fetal medicine (MFM) ultrasound (U/S) training experience during fellowship. An anonymous survey of 51 questions was distributed to 114 postgraduate year (PGY-6) MFM fellows (from 75 MFM programs) registered to attend the annual Gottesfeld-Hohler Memorial Foundation MFM Fellow Ultrasound Training Course in December 2019. For programs with more than one PGY-6 fellow, instructions were given for only one fellow to represent the program. The survey included continuous, ordinal, and categorical scale questions on U/S training structure, fellows’ self-perception of U/S capabilities, research, mentorship, and technical aspects of sonography. Categorical outcomes were compared using chi-square test and Fisher’s exact test, as appropriate. Completed surveys were submitted by 72 fellows (96% response rate), with 10 (13.9%) from the West, 16 (22.2%) Midwest, 17 (23.6%) South, and 29 (40.3%) Northeast. The majority of fellows reported feeling comfortable performing growth U/S (78%) and uterine artery Doppler interrogations (58%), and feeling uncomfortable with 3D U/S, neurosonography, and fetal echocardiography (Table 1). Fellows undergoing training in the South were less likely to report feeling comfortable performing detailed anatomic surveys and nuchal translucency (NT) when compared to other regions (NT: p=0.046; anatomy: p=0.011) (Table 1). Fellows in the Northeast were more likely to report feeling comfortable performing chorionic villus sampling (CVS) when compared to other regions (p=0.001) (Table 2). There was no difference among fellowship programs in U/S curriculum, bedside teaching, ultrasound-focused research mentorship, or months of U/S training. There is wide geographic variation in fellow comfort with U/S and diagnostic procedures in the United States. This study highlights the need for further optimization and standardization of MFM fellowship U/S training, especially in advanced sonography and diagnostic procedures.View Large Image Figure ViewerDownload Hi-res image Download (PPT)