Women's Attitude to Ultrasound Evaluation in Pregnancy in an African Setting
Article Sidebar
Views | PDF/EPUB Downloads:
11
/ 2
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objective: This is a cross-sectional study to assess the knowledge, attitude and perception of pregnant women to the use of ultrasound in antenatal investigation in an African setting.
Centre: Department of Radiology, University of Benin Teaching Hospital Benin-City Nigeria
Methodology: A prospective study of all women referred for ultrasound scanning between 1" November 2006 and February 2007 for antenatal investigation, who consented to interview by self administered, pre-tested structured questionnaires. Two hundred and twenty questionnaires were analyzed. Analysis was done using SPSS version 13.0 and were tested with the Chi-square and fisher's exact test within a 95% confidence interval.
Results: Majority of the respondents were between the ages of 25-29 years (40%). More than half of the respondents had educational level up to tertiary level (54.5%) and a large number of them were for routine investigation (78.2%). Majority of the respondents had uncritical view of ultrasound, and few who expressed some reservations, desired reduction in waiting time and cost of procedure.
Conclusion: This study concluded that high educational level of respondents, contributed to positive attitude and perception of this study group to antenatal ultrasound investigation.
Downloads
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
How to Cite
References
1) Hadlock FP, Deter RI., Harrist RB, Park SK Foetal bi-parietal diameter, critical evaluation of the relation to menstrual age by means of real-time LSS. Journal of ultrasound in medicine 1982; vol 1(3):97-10)
2) Campbell 5, Warsol SL, Little D, Cooper DJ, Routine ultrasound screening for the prediction of gestational age. Obstet Gynecol 1985; 65(5): 613-620
3) Doman KJ, Hansmann M, Redford DFL, Wittmann BK. Foetal weight measurement by real-time ultrasound measurement of bi parietal and transverse trunk diameter. Am JObstet Gynecol 1982;142(6 pt1): 652-7
4) Hadlock FP, Harrist RB, Shah Y, King DE, Park SK, Sharman RS. Estimating foetal age using multiple parameter a prospective evaluation in a racially mixed population. AMJ Obstet Gynaecol 1987/156(4): 955-957
5) Kouam 1. Salihu HM, Boyom F. The value of ultrasound measurements in the Cameroonian child. Journal Obstet Gynaecol 2000, 20(4): 385-8
6) Mariho AO, Bamgboye EA. Assessment of foetal femur length by ultrasound in a normal Nigerian obstetric population. Afr ) Med Sel 1987, 16(2):47-52
7) Okonofua FE, Atoyebi FA. Accuracy of prediction of gestational age by ultrasound measurement of biparietal diameter in Nigerian woman. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1989, 28(3):217-9
8. Okonofua FE, Ayangade SO, Ajibulu OA. Ultrasound measurement of foetal abdominal circumference and the ratio of biparietal diameter to transverse abdominal diameter in a mixed Nigeria population Int Gynaecol Obstet 1988; 27(1):1-6
9) Ayangade 50, Okonofua FE. Normal growth of the fetal biparietal diameter in an African Population. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1986;24(1):35-42
10) Marchie TT, Otoibhi OE, Ogbeide E, Irabor PFL Ogonja SZ. Random 2 dimensional ultrasonic evaluation of Uterine cervix in pregnancy. Saudi Med Journal 2006; 27(2): 269-271.
11) Whynes DK Receipt of Information and women's attitude towards ultrasound scanning during pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynaecol 2002, 19:7-12.
12) Eurenius K, Axelsson O, Gallatedt-Franasin 1, Sjoden P. Perception of information, expectations, and experiences among women and their partners attending a second-trimester routine ultrasound scan. Ultrasound Obstet Gynaecol 1997;986-90
13) Harrington K, Armstrong V. Freeman J. Aquilina Campbell S. Fetal sexing by ultrasound in the second trimester: maternal preference and professional ability. Ultrasound Obstet Gynaecol 1996; 8: 318-321
14) Kamel HS, Ahmed HN, Eissa MA, Abel Oyoun A-SM. Psychological and obstetrical esponses of mothers following antennal foetal sex identification. Journal Obstet Gynaecol Res 1999; 25:43-50.
15) Tani M, Hunter M. Ultrasound scanning in pregnancy: consumer mactions, Journal Reprod Infant Psychol 1997;5 43-48
16) Zlotogorski Z, Tadmor O, Rabinowita R Diamant Y. Parent attitude toward obstetric ultrasound examination. Journal Obstet Gynaecol Res 1997,23: 25-
17)Hyde B. An interview study of pregnant women's attitude to ultrasound scanning. Social Science and Medicine 1996, 22:587 92
18) Munim 5, Khawaja NA, Qureshi R. Knowledge and awareness of pregnant women about ultrasound scanning and prenatal diagnosis. J Pak Med Asane 2004; 54 (11):553.5.
19) Bashour H. Hafez R, Abdulsalam A. Syrian women's perception of ultrasound screening in pregnancy: implications for antenatal policy. Reprod Health Matters 2005,13(25): 147-154.