Download PDF
Am J Perinatol 2006; 23(6): 355-362
DOI: 10.1055/s-2006-947723
Copyright © 2006 by Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc., 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Obstetrician-Gynecologists' Practice and Knowledge Regarding Spina Bifida

Catherine M. Shaer1 , Nancy Chescheir2 , Kristine Erickson3 , Jay Schulkin4
  • 1George Washington University Biostatistics Center, Rockville, Maryland
  • 2Lonnie S. and Betty Burnett Chair of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
  • 3Department of Psychology, American University, Washington, District of Columbia
  • 4American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Washington, District of Columbia
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
13 July 2006 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

The purpose was to assess practicing obstetrician-gynecologists' knowledge about the prenatal diagnosis and postnatal prognosis of spina bifida. Written questionnaires designed to assess practicing obstetrician-gynecologists' knowledge of spina bifida were mailed to 1000 randomly selected American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Fellows. More than 50% did not identify many of the sonographic features indicative of an open neural tube defect in the fetus and more than one third overestimated the risks of stillbirth, whereas more than two thirds overestimated the risk for premature delivery in a pregnancy complicated by fetal spina bifida. Just more than 50% correctly estimated the 1-year survival rate and just less than 50% correctly estimated survival at 6 years. Sixty-six percent overestimated the incidence of mental retardation associated with spina bifida. Maternal-fetal medicine specialists returning the survey exhibited a much better understanding of the prenatal issues and prognostic and outcome factors related to spina bifida. There are gaps in obstetrician-gynecologists' knowledge about the diagnostic features of and prognosis for fetal spina bifida. It is important for them to take advantage of continuing medical education opportunities to learn more about the management of pregnancies complicated by fetal spina bifida and about the prognosis for affected individuals.

KEYWORDS

Myelomeningocele pregnancy outcome - spina bifida - open neural tube defect

REFERENCES

  • 1 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention . Spina bifida and anencephaly before and after folic acid mandate-United States, 1995-1996 and 1999-2000.  MMWR. 2004;  53 362-365
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Nicolaides K H, Campbell S, Gabbe S G, Guidetti R. Ultrasound screening for spina bifida: cranial and cerebellar signs.  Lancet. 1986;  2 72-74
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Campbell J, Gilbert W M, Nicolaides K H, Campbell S. Ultrasound screening for spina bifida: cranial and cerebellar signs in a high-risk population.  Obstet Gynecol. 1987;  70 247-250
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention . Spina bifida incidence at birth-United States, 1983-1990.  MMWR. 1992;  41 497-500
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Partington M D, McLone D G. Hereditary factors in the etiology of neural tube defects. Results of a survey.  Pediatr Neurosurg. 1995;  23 311-316
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Artama M, Auvinen A, Raudaskoski T, Isojarvi I, Isojarvi J. Antiepileptic drug use of women with epilepsy and congenital malformations in offspring.  Neurology. 2005;  64 1874-1878
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Bruno M K, Harden C L. Epilepsy in pregnant women.  Curr Treat Options Neurol. 2002;  4 31-40
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Anderson J L, Waller D K, Canfield M A, Shaw G M, Watkins M L, Werler M M. Maternal obesity, gestational diabetes and central nervous system birth defects.  Epidemiology. 2005;  16 87-92
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Crane J P, LeFevre M L, Winborn R C et al.. A randomized trial of prenatal ultrasonographic screening: impact on the detection, management, and outcome of anomalous fetuses. The RADIUS Study Group.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994;  171 392-399
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Personal Communication .Joseph Mulinare, M.D. Medical Epidemiologist. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2005
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Wong L Y, Paulozzi L J. Survival of infants with spina bifida: a population study, 1979-94.  Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2001;  15 374-378
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 McLone D G. Results of treatment of children born with myelomeningocele.  Clin Neurosurg. 1983;  30 407-412
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Bowman R M, McLone D G, Grant J A, Tomita T, Ito J A. Spina bifida outcome: a 25-year prospective.  Pediatr Neurosurg. 2001;  34 114-120
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Steinbok P, Irvine B, Cochrane D D, Irwin B J. Long-term outcome and complications of children born with meningomyelocele.  Childs Nerv Syst. 1992;  8 92-96
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Rauzzino M, Oakes W J. Chiari II malformation and syringomyelia.  Neurosurg Clin N Am. 1995;  6 293-309
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Bell J E, Gordon A, Maloney A F. The association of hydrocephalus and Arnold- Chiari malformation with spina bifida in the fetus.  Neuropathol Appl Neurobiol. 1980;  6 29-39
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Peralta C F, Bunduki V, Plese J P, Figueiredo E G, Miguelez J, Zugaib M. Association between prenatal sonographic findings and post-natal outcome in 30 cases of isolated spina bifida aperta.  Prenat Diagn. 2003;  23 311-314
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Ramin K D, Raffel R J, Breckle R J, Ogburn P L, Friedman J D, Ramsey P S. Chronology of neurological manifestations of prenatally diagnosed open neural tube defects.  J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2002;  11 89-92
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Dias M S, McClone D G. Hydrocephalus in the child with dysraphism.  Neurosurg Clin N Am. 1993;  4 715-726
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Muller T, Arbeiter K, Augricht C. Renal function in meningomyelocele: risk factors, chronic renal failure, renal replacement therapy and transplantation.  Curr Opin Urol. 2002;  12 479-484
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Williams E N, Broughton N S, Menelaus M B. Age-related walking in children with spina bifida.  Dev Med Child Neurol. 1999;  41 446-449
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Findley T W, Agre J C, Habeck R V, Schmalz R, Birkebak R, McNally M C. Ambulation in the adolescent with myelomeningocele. I: Early childhood predictors.  Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1987;  68 18-22
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Hunt G M, Oakeshott P. Outcome in people with open spina bifida at age 35: prospective community based cohort.  BMJ. 2003;  326 1365-1366
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Oakeshott P, Hunt G M. Long term outcome in open spina bifida.  Br J Gen Pract. 2003;  53 632-636
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Soare P L, Raimondi A J. Intellectual and perceptual-motor characteristics of treated myelomeningocele children.  Am J Dis Child. 1977;  131 199-204
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Chi J H, Fullerton H J, Gupta N. Time trends and demographics of deaths from congenital hydrocephalus in children in the United States: National Center for Health Statistics data, 1979-1998.  J Neurosurg. 2005;  103 113-118
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Biggio Jr J R, Owne J, Wenstrom K D, Oakes W J. Can prenatal ultrasound findings predict ambulatory status in fetuses with open spina bifida?.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;  185 1016-1020
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Snodgrass W T, Adams R. Initial urologic management of myelomeningocele.  Urol Clin North Am. 2004;  31 427-434
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Catherine ShaerM.D. 

Senior Research Scientist, George Washington University Biostatistics Center

6110 Executive Boulevard, Suite 750, Rockville, MD 20852

      >