Choose your font:
 Arimo
 Merriweather
 Mukta Malar
 Open Sans Condensed
 Rokkitt
 Source Sans Pro
 Login


 English 
 Français 
 Português 

[Valid RSS] RSS
bar

Database - Alliance francophone pour l'accouchement respecté (AFAR)

Description of this bibliographical database (AFAR website)
Currently 3046 records
YouTube channel (tutorial)

https://afar.info/id=2445

Created on : 29 Jun 2014
Modified on : 29 Jun 2014

 Modify this record
Do not follow this link unless you know an editor’s password!


Share: Facebook logo   Tweeter logo   Hard

Bibliographical entry (without author) :

2005 Nonmedical Fetal Ultrasound - Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine - Vol. 25, 3 - ISBN: 0278-4297, 1550-9613 - p.331-335

Author(s) :

Wax, Joseph R; Cartin, Angelina; Pinette, Michael G; Blackstone, Jacquelyn

Year of publication :

2006

URL(s) :

http://www.jultrasoundmed.org/content/25/3/331.sho…

Résumé (français)  :

Abstract (English)  :

Objective. The purpose of this study was to evaluate knowledge and opinions regarding nonmedical fetal ultrasound (NMFU) in obstetricians (OB) and radiologists (R). Methods. A questionnaire was sent to all Maine fellows of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists practicing obstetrics and members of the Maine Society of Radiology in April 2005. Results. Among OB, 52 (81.2%), 24 (37.5%), 45 (75.0%), and 56 (87.5%) did not know whether the American College of Radiology, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine, or US Food and Drug Administration held positions on NMFU. Among R, 11 (37.9%), 27 (93.1%), 19 (65.5%), and 24 (82.7%) did not know whether the organizations held positions. More R than OB agreed that women might forego medical ultrasound after NMFU (62.1% versus 49.2%; P = .05), whereas more OB than R believed fetal anomalies would go undetected during NMFU (79.4% versus 62.1%; P = .04). OB and R had concerns for false-positive NMFU diagnoses (41.9% and 31.0%), false reassurance by NMFU (76.2% and 62.1%), poor imaging causing anxiety (39.7% and 51.7%), and lack of physician availability to review suspected abnormalities on NMFU (73.0% and 65.5%). Sizable minorities of OB and R believed NMFU providers should be disciplined by licensing boards (33.9% and 44.8%), excluded from society memberships (22.9% and 37.9%), or reported to the Food and Drug Administration (21.3% and 31.0%). Conclusions. Most Maine OB and R are aware of their own but not each other’s professional or regulatory NMFU positions yet practice within these guidelines. Most respondents do not favor sanctioning colleagues performing NMFU.

Sumário (português)  :

Comments :

Argument (français) :

Argument (English):

Argumento (português):

Keywords :

➡ ultrasound scanning

Author of this record :

Import 29/06/2014 — 29 Jun 2014

Discussion (display only in English)
 
➡ Only identified users



 I have read the guidelines of discussions and I accept all terms (read guidelines)

barre

New expert query --- New simple query

Creating new record --- Importing records

User management --- Dump database --- Contact

bar

This database is managed by Alliance francophone pour l'accouchement respecté (AFAR, https://afar.info)
affiliated with Collectif interassociatif autour de la naissance (CIANE, https://ciane.net).
It is fed by the voluntary contributions of persons interested in the sharing of scientific data.
If you agree with this project, you can support us in several ways:
(1) contributing to this database if you have a minimum training in documentation
(2) or financially supporting AFAR (see below)
(3) or joining the AFAR (or another society affiliated with CIANE).
Sign in or create an account to follow changes or become an editor.
Contact afar.association(arobase)gmail.com for more information.

Valid CSS! Valid HTML!
Donating to AFAR (click “Faire un don”) will help us to maintain and develop sites and public
databases towards the support of parents and caregivers’ informed decisions with respect to childbirth