Search

Objective: The aim of this study was to describe women's experiences before, under, and after a guided internet-based intervention for vulvodynia. Methods: The design was qualitative, based on content analysis. Participants were women who had undergone guided internet-based treatment for vulvodynia based on acceptance and commitment therapy principles (n = 13). Data were collected through in-depth interviews approximately-one month after participants completed treatment. Results: The analysis revealed the women's experiences of internet-based treatment for vulvodynia. Three themes emerged: “dealing with pain alone,” which was related to experiences of living with vulvodynia before internet-based treatment; “finding new ways,” which described the experiences of undergoing an internet-based treatment for vulvodynia and “feeling empowered to take control,” referring to the experiences of living with vulvodynia after the internet-based treatment. The women described a long search for a diagnosis, revealing a negative experience of healthcare. The internet-based treatment helped them find new ways to manage vulvodynia, but difficulties with the treatment were also experienced. After the intervention, the women reported improvements in wellbeing and having better strategies to manage pain, but also stated that the treatment was insufficient to perceive changes in vulvar pain. Conclusions: The guided internet-based treatment program for vulvodynia based on acceptance and commitment therapy principles was perceived as credible, helpful to manage vulvodynia, and could serve as a complement to regular care. Questions regarding the need for more support and optimal length of treatment need to be further evaluated.

Background Vulvodynia is defined as vulvar pain for at least 3 months without a clear cause. To the best of our knowledge, there are no trials investigating the effects of internet treatment using CBT (Cognitive behavioural therapy) treatment with Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) components for women with vulvodynia. The aim of this study is to examine the effects of such a guided internet-based intervention on provoked vulvar pain during the waiting period before clinical treatment. Methods We will randomise 52 patients to either guided internet-based intervention with CBT with (ACT) components or no intervention during the waiting period for treatment as usual. Online assessments are conducted at baseline, posttreatment, and at follow-up after 9 months. The primary outcome measure is provoked vulvar pain. Secondary outcomes are depression, anxiety, sexual function, and quality of life. Linear-mixed effect models will be used to assess the effect of the internet-based intervention on vulvar pain, pain acceptance, depression, anxiety, sexual function, and quality of life over time, by applying the intention-to-treat approach. Continuous data will be analysed with general linear models using intention-to-treat and also per protocol approaches to assess the effects of the intervention at different time points. Ordinal and binary data will be analysed with Mann Whitney's test, Fischer's exact test and multivariate logistic regression, respectively. Discussion As a randomised controlled trial with short- and long-term follow-up points, the EMBLA study intends to provide a novel and better understanding regarding the treatment of vulvodynia and the role of internet-based treatment as a complement to standard care for women suffering from vulvodynia. The effects of vulvodynia on pain, sexual function, quality of life, depression, and anxiety are investigated. The study's results are expected to be of value in the planning of clinical care in the medical area. High dropout rates and technical difficulties associated with using the platform are common in similar studies. Trial registration number NCT02809612, Highlights • A randomised trial can give a better understanding of treatment for vulvodynia. • The effects of internet-based treatment will be investigated. • Well-accepted self-assessment questionnaires are used. • High dropout rates and technical difficulties are common in similar studies.

Historically, pregnancy dating has been based on self-reported information on the first day of the last menstrual period. In the 1970s, ultrasound biometry was introduced as an alternative for pregnancy dating and is now the leading method in Nordic countries. The use of ultrasound led to a reduction of post-term births and fewer inductions, and is considered more precise than last menstrual period-based methods for pregnancy dating. Nevertheless, differences in early growth and specific situations, such as maternal obesity, can render its estimates less precise, leading to gestational age misclassification. Clinical implications of ultrasound dating include effect on timely induction in case of post-term pregnancies, treatment with corticosteroids in cases of anticipated preterm delivery and decision on viability in cases of extreme prematurity. Furthermore, gestational age misclassification may influence the numbers and the magnitude of some adverse perinatal outcomes, closely related to gestational age, which are recorded in the Nordic birth registers.

Background. Swedish national guidelines for pregnancy dating were published in 2010. Follow-up is needed to assess adherence and to identify whether any clinical topics are not covered in the guidelines. Methods. All units in Sweden that performed ultrasound-based pregnancy dating were asked to complete a web-based questionnaire comprising multiple-response questions and commentary fields. Information was collected regarding baseline information, current and previous clinical practice, and management of discrepancies between last-menstrual-period- and ultrasound-based methods for pregnancy dating. Results. The response rate was 88% (38/43 units). Half of the units offered first-trimester ultrasound to all pregnant women. However, contrary to the guidelines, the crown–rump length was not used for ultrasound-based pregnancy dating in most units. Ultrasound-based pregnancy dating was performed only if the biparietal diameter was between 21 and 55 mm. The methods for management of discrepancies between methods for pregnancy dating varied widely. Conclusions. The units reported high adherence to national guidelines, except for early pregnancy dating, for which many units followed unwritten or informal guidelines. The management of discrepancies between last-menstrual-period-based and ultrasound-based estimated day of delivery varied widely. These findings emphasize the need for regular updating of national written guidelines and efforts to improve their implementation in all units. Discrepancy between pregnancy dating methods – correlates and outcomes

To assess associations between discrepancy of pregnancy dating methods and adverse pregnancy, delivery, and neonatal outcomes, odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for discrepancy categories among all singleton births from the Medical Birth Register (1995–2010) with estimated date of delivery (EDD) by last menstrual period (LMP) minus EDD by ultrasound (US) −20 to +20 days. Negative/positive discrepancy was a fetus smaller/larger than expected when dated by US (EDD postponed/changed to an earlier date). Large discrepancy was th or >90th percentile. Reference was median discrepancy ±2 days. Odds for diabetes and preeclampsia were higher in pregnancies with negative discrepancy, and for most delivery outcomes in case of large positive discrepancy (+9 to +20 days): shoulder dystocia [OR 1.16 (95% CI 1.01–1.33)] and sphincter injuries [OR 1.13 (95% CI 1.09–1.17)]. Odds for adverse neonatal outcomes were higher in large negative discrepancy (−4 to −20 days): low Apgar score [OR 1.18 (95% CI 1.09–1.27)], asphyxia [OR 1.18 (95% CI 1.11–1.25)], fetal death [OR 1.47 (95% CI 1.32–1.64)], and neonatal death [OR 2.19 (95% CI 1.91–2.50)]. In conclusion, especially, large negative discrepancy was associated with increased risks of adverse perinatal outcomes.

Introduction Gestational age is estimated by ultrasound using fetal size as a proxy for age, although variance in early growth affects reliability. The aim of this study was to identify characteristics associated with discrepancies between last menstrual period‐based (EDD‐LMP) and ultrasound‐based (EDD‐US) estimated delivery dates. Material and methods We identified all singleton births (n = 1 201 679) recorded in the Swedish Medical Birth Register in 1995–2010, to assess the association between maternal/fetal characteristics and large negative and large positive discrepancies (EDD‐LMP earlier than EDD‐US and 10th percentile in the discrepancy distribution vs. EDD‐LMP later than EDD‐US and 90th percentile). Analyses were adjusted for age, parity, height, body mass index, smoking, and employment status. Results Women with a body mass index >40 kg/m2 had the highest odds for large negative discrepancies (−9 to −20 days) [odds ratio (OR) 2.16, 95% CI 2.01–2.33]. Other factors associated with large negative discrepancies were: diabetes, young maternal age, multiparity, body mass index between 30 and 39.9 kg/m2 or +1 SD), and unemployment. Conclusions Several maternal and fetal characteristics were associated with discrepancies between dating methods. Systematic associations of discrepancies with maternal height, fetal sex, and partly obesity, may reflect an influence on the precision of the ultrasound estimate due to variance in early growth.

Background Assessing gestational age by ultrasound can introduce a systematic bias due to sex differences in early growth. Methods This cohort study included data on 1,314,602 births recorded in the Swedish Medical Birth Register. We compared rates of prematurity-related adverse outcomes in male infants born early term (gestational week 37–38) or late preterm (gestational week 35–36), in relation to female infants, between a time period when pregnancy dating was based on the last menstrual period (1973–1978), and a time period when ultrasound was used for pregnancy dating (1995–2010), in order to assess the method’s influence on outcome by fetal sex. Results As expected, adverse outcomes were lower in the later time period, but the reduction in prematurity-related morbidity was less marked for male than for female infants. After changing the pregnancy dating method, male infants born early term had, in relation to female infants, higher odds for pneumothorax (Cohort ratio [CR] 2.05; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.33–3.16), respiratory distress syndrome of the newborn (CR 1.99; 95 % CI 1.33–2.98), low Apgar score (CR 1.26; 5 % CI 1.08–1.47), and hyperbilirubinemia (CR 1.12; 95 % CI 1.06–1.19), when outcome was compared between the two time periods. A similar trend was seen for late preterm male infants. Conclusion Misclassification of gestational age by ultrasound, due to size differences, can partially explain currently reported sex differences in early term and late preterm infants’ adverse neonatal outcomes, and should be taken into account in clinical decisions and when interpreting study results related to fetal sex. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12884-016-1129-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.