Benjie B. Mills

Chlorhexidine vaginal irrigation for the prevention of peripartal infection: a placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE Our purpose was to determine whether chlorhexidine vaginal irrigation prevents maternal peripartal infection. STUDY DESIGN A double-blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized trial was performed. Single 200 ml irrigations of either 0.2% chlorhexidine solution or sterile water placebo were given in active labor or before planned cesarean delivery. The primary outcome measure was the combined rate of chorioamnionitis and endometritis (which were mutually exclusive diagnoses). RESULTS A total of 1024 patients were enrolled: 508 in the chlorhexidine group and 516 in the placebo group. The two groups were generally well balanced on important clinical factors but differed (p < 0.05) in rates of nulliparity (chlorhexidine 42%, placebo 52%), intrauterine pressure catheter usage (chlorhexidine 65%, placebo 72%), and presence of meconium (chlorhexidine 17%, placebo 22%). There were no recognized adverse maternal or neonatal reactions to irrigation. Rates of infection (chorioamnionitis + endometritis) did not differ significantly between the groups, chlorhexidine 10% versus placebo 13% (relative risk 0.8, 95% confidence interval 0.5 to 1.1). Stratified and logistic regression analyses supported the primary univariate analysis. Neonatal outcomes, including sepsis rates of 0.4%, were equivalent for the groups. CONCLUSION As used in this trial, chlorhexidine lacked efficacy in the prevention of maternal peripartal infection.

Physician Opinions Regarding Elective Bilateral Salpingectomy With Hysterectomy and for Sterilization

STUDY OBJECTIVE To gather opinions about the benefits and concerns of performing bilateral salpingectomy without oophorectomy during hysterectomy for benign indications and as a sterilization procedure. DESIGN Survey study (Canadian Task Force classification III). SETTING Practicing physicians in US institutions that have obstetrics and gynecology residency programs listed on the FREIDA website were surveyed electronically. INTERVENTION A validated, standardized questionnaire designed to gather opinions about bilateral salpingectomy performed during hysterectomy or for sterilization was administered via SurveyMonkey to practitioners of obstetrics and gynecology. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS Results were compiled and presented as percentages of total responders. A total of 234 surveys were returned. Fifty-four percent of physicians perform bilateral salpingectomy during hysterectomy, most commonly to reduce the risks of cancer (75%) and repeat operation (49.1%). Of the 45.5% of physicians who do not perform bilateral salpingectomy during hysterectomy, most (69.4%) believe there is no benefit. Fifty-eight percent of practitioners believe that bilateral salpingectomy is the most effective method of sterilization after age 35 years but choose this method only in patients in whom one sterilization procedure has failed or because of tubal disease. Only 7.2% of surgeons prefer it as an interval sterilization procedure. CONCLUSION Most practitioners believe that bilateral salpingectomy is beneficial. Most also believe that bilateral salpingectomy is the most effective sterilization procedure; however, only 7.2% use this method as an interval procedure. More data are needed to evaluate the prophylactic effect of bilateral salpingectomy against postoperative sequelae.

Six- and twelve-month documented removal rates among women electing postpartum inpatient compared to delayed or interval contraceptive implant insertions after Medicaid payment reform.

OBJECTIVE This study aims to document 6- and 12-month removal rates for women receiving the contraceptive implant inpatient postpartum versus those receiving the same contraceptive method during an outpatient visit, in a setting where postpartum inpatient long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) services (devices plus provider insertion costs) are reimbursed by Medicaid. STUDY DESIGN We conducted a retrospective cohort study among Medicaid-enrolled women using medical record review for all women receiving the etonogestrel implant between July 1, 2007 and June 30, 2014. We compared the percentage of women with the implant removed at 6 and 12 months as well as reasons for early removal, for inpatient postpartum implant insertions vs. delayed postpartum or interval outpatient implant insertions. RESULTS A total of 4% of women (34/776 insertions) had documented implant removal within 6 months post-insertion, with no difference between postpartum inpatient and outpatient (delayed postpartum or interval). A total of 12% (62/518 insertions) of women had documented implant removal within 12 months. A lower percentage of women with postpartum inpatient insertions had the implant removed at 12 months post-insertion, compared to outpatient insertions (7% vs. 14%, p=.04). After controlling for age, parity, race and body mass index, women with postpartum inpatient insertions were less likely to have the implant removed within 12 months (OR=0.44, 95% CI 0.20-0.97). The most commonly stated reason for removal was abnormal uterine bleeding, regardless of insertion timing. CONCLUSION In a setting with a Medicaid policy that covers postpartum inpatient LARC insertion, a low percentage of women who received an implant immediately postpartum had it removed within 1 year of insertion. IMPLICATIONS A Medicaid payment policy that removes institutional barriers to offering postpartum inpatient contraceptive implants to women free-of-charge may facilitate meeting womens desires and intentions to delay subsequent pregnancy, as evidenced by low removal rates up to 12 months post-insertion. Further research with women is needed to assess how these services meet their postpartum contraceptive needs and desires to postpone or prevent subsequent pregnancy.