S. Munim ( Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology,The Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi. )
N. A. Khawaja ( Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology,The Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi. )
R. Qureshi ( Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology,The Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi. )
November 2004, Volume 54, Issue 11
Original Article
Abstract
Objective: Antenatal screening and ultrasound scan has become an integral part of the antenatal care in the present time. The aim of this study is to accurately describe the background knowledge and awareness of pregnant women about ultrasound scan and prenatal diagnosis.
Methods: It is a clinic based cross sectional study. Four hundred women, attending the antenatal clinics, were asked to fill in a pre tested structured questionnaire. Different variables of interest were collected. Statistical Program for the social sciences (SPSS) was used for the data management.
Results: Over 93.5% of the women were aware that ultrasound examination is an important investigation. They believed that it should be performed at least twice during pregnancy but were not sure about the timing of the test. Most of them felt that it was to check the growth of the baby and 97% of women considered ultrasound to be safe. However, only 26% of women had any knowledge about Down's syndrome or its screening.
Conclusion: Pregnant women in our set-up are aware of importance of ultrasound examination during pregnancy. However, there is a need to improve public awareness of problems like Down's syndrome (JPMA 54: 553;2004).
Introduction
We do not have any information regarding the knowledge, attitude and perception of women about ultrasound scanning during pregnancy in Pakistan. This study explores the pregnant women's background knowledge and attitude regarding this examination.
Subjects and Methods
Results
On enquiring about the knowledge regarding ultrasound we found that 93% of women knew that ultrasound scan is necessary during pregnancy. Majority of women responded that ultrasound should be done at least once or may be twice during pregnancy. In this set of questions, study subjects responded 'mental retardation' as a congenital disorder, but when they were further asked about 'Down's syndrome' only 26% were aware of this (Table 1).
Table 1. Pregnant women's knowledge about the ultrasound examination (n = 400). | ||
Question | Answer | Women's |
response (%) | ||
Do you feel that ultrasound is | Yes | 374 (93.5) |
necessary in pregnancy | No | 10 (2.5) |
Do not know | 16 (4.0) | |
How often if should be done? | Once | 44 (11.0) |
Twice | 184 (46.0) | |
More than twice | 152 (38.0) | |
Do not know | 20 (5.0) | |
Do you know what are | Yes | 305 (76.3) |
congenital abnormalities? | No | 94 (23.5) |
If yes, what are these?* | Do not know | 1 (0.3) |
Mental abnormalities | 273 (68.4) | |
Cardiac | 53 (13.3) | |
Abnormalities | 61 (15.3) | |
Cleft lip or/and palate | 20 (5.0) | |
Others | ||
Do you know what is | Yes | 103 (25.8) |
Down’s syndrome? | No | 297 (74.2) |
*Multiple response questions. Sum is not equal to hundred. |
Table 2. Pregnant women's expectation from their ultrasound | |
Questions | Answers (%)* |
Assess fetal growth | 307 (82.1) |
Determine fetal viability | 199 (53.2) |
To confirm the estimated date of delivery | 20 (5.4) |
Determine fetal sex | 66 (17.6) |
Detect the number of babies | 14 (3.7) |
Diagnose congenital abnormality | 194 (51.9) |
Detect obstetrical complications | 8 (2.1) |
*Multiple response questions. Sum is not equal to hundred. |
Discussion
In Conclusion, a great majority of women in our set-up consider ultrasound scans to be a useful test during pregnancy. This is through their personal experience and supplemented by that of friends. However, there is a need for more public awareness about Down's syndrome and its screening. This study has its limitations being a questionnaire study. However, it provides a valuable information as it suggests that there is a need for more public awareness about Down's syndrome screening. This can be done by adequate counselling along with patient information leaflets at the time of antenatal booking visit. In addition, CME education programs for the General practitioners general public can also play an important role.
References
1. Levi S. Routine ultrasound screening of congenital abnormalities: an overview of the European experience. Ann NY Acad Sci 1998;847:86-98.
2. Curtin SC. Recent changes in birth attendant, place of birth and use of obstetric interventions, United States, 1989-1997. J Nurse Midwifery 1999;44:349-54.
3. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Ultrasound Screening for Fetal Abnormalities. Report of the RCOG Working Party. London Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, 1997. 3 Previous 1.
4. Bricker L, Garcia J, Mugford M , et al. Ultrasound screening in pregnancy, a systemic review of the clinical effectiveness, cost effectiveness and women's view. Health Technol Assess 2000:4:I-vi, 1-193.
5. Routine second trimester ultrasonography in the United States; a cost benefit analysis. Am J Obstetric Cynical 2000;182:655-60.
6. Zlotogorski Z, Tadmor O, Rabinowitz R, et al. Parental attitudes toward obstetric ultrasound examination. J Obstet Gynaecology Res 1997;23:25-8.
7. Fletcher, J, Evans M. Maternal bonding in early fetal ultrasound examination. N Engl J Med 1983;308:392-5.
8. Waldenstrom U, Axelesson O, Nilsson S, et al. Effects of routine one-stage ultrasound screening in pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial. Lancet 1988; 2:585-8.
9. Villeneuve C, Laroche C, Lippman A, et al. Psychological aspects of ultrasound imaging during pregnancy. Can J Psychiatry 1988;22:530-6.
10. Larsen T, Nguyen T H, Munk M, et al. Ultrasound screening in the second trimester: the pregnant woman's background knowledge, expectations, experiences and acceptances. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2000;15:383-6.
11. Whynes DK. Receipt of information and women's attitudes towards ultrasound scanning during pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstetric Gynecol 2002;19:7-12.
12. Heazell A, North LC, Mahmoud S, et al. A prospective study of women's expectations and knowledge of the mid trimester anomaly scan. Ultrasound Obstetric Gynecol (Supple 1), 2003, p. 88.
13. Eurenius K, Axelsson O, Gallsted-Franssin I, et al. Perception of information, expectations and experiences among women and their partners attending second-trimester routine ultrasound scan. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1997;9:86-90.
14. Chilaka VN, Konje VC, Stewart CR, et al. Knowledge of Down's syndrome in the different ethnic origins. Prenat Diagn 2001;21:159-64.
15. Mulvey S, Wallace EM. Levels of knowledge of Down's syndrome and Down's syndrome testing in the Australian women. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2001;41:67-9.
Related Articles
Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association has agreed to receive and publish manuscripts in accordance with the principles of the following committees: