New Developing Role of Midwifery Profession: Obsetric Ultrasound Examination

Year 2020, Volume: 10 Issue: 3, 284 - 294, 23.09.2020

Yasemin Sökmen , Ayten Taşpınar

https://doi.org/10.31020/mutftd.707209

Abstract

The aim of this study is to present the current information about obstetric ultrasound examination, which is one of the newly developing professional roles of midwives. Based on the current literature, this review has been scanned with the concepts of "midwifery", "obstetric ultrasound", "midwifery", "obstetric ultrasound" on PubMed, Cochrane and Google Academic pages. The results obtained from the screening are presented interpretively. Duties, powers and responsibilities are given to the midwives for obstetric ultrasound examination especially due to insufficient health personnel, excessive rural living, high maternal and fetal mortality and morbidity rates, detection of maternal and fetal complications, decreasing the cost of health care and increasing the quality of service. Ultrasound examination for midwives special training or courses are organized to start the application, researches show positive results and are supported by health professionals. In line with these results, it is recommended to make the necessary arrangements on the duties, powers and responsibilities of the midwives and the education curriculum, to organize obstetric ultrasound courses, to support and supervise the midwives working in the field as a result of the arrangements and trainings provided.

Keywords

Midwifery, Ultrasound, Obstetric ultrasound

Project Number

Bulunmamaktadır.

Ebelik Mesleğinin Yeni Gelişen Rolü: Obsetrik Ultrason Muayenesi

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, ebelerin yeni gelişen mesleki rollerinden biri olan obstetrik ultrason muayenesi ile ilgili güncel bilgileri ortaya koymaktır. Bu derleme mevcut literatüre dayalı olarak PubMed, Cochrane ve Google Akademik sayfaları üzerinden “ebelik”, “obstetrik ultrason”, “midwifery”, “obstetric ultrasound” kavramları ile taranmıştır. Tarama sonucunda elde edilen bulgular yorumlayıcı şekilde sunulmuştur. Özellikle sağlık personelinin yetersizliği, kırsal alanda yaşayan bireylerin fazlalığı, anne ve fetüs mortalite ve morbidite oranlarının yüksek olması, maternal ve fetal komplikasyonların tespit edilmesi, sağlık hizmet maliyetinin azaltılması ve hizmet kalitesinin arttırılması gibi nedenlerden dolayı ebelere obstetrik ultrason muayenesi için görev, yetki ve sorumluluklar verilmektedir. Ebelere ultrason muayenesi için özel eğitim ya da kurslar düzenlenmekte, yapılan araştırmalar olumlu yönde sonuç göstermekte ve sağlık çalışanları tarafından da desteklenmektedir. Bu sonuçlar doğrultusunda ülkemizde ebelerin obstetrik ultrason muayenesi yapabilmesi için ebelerin görev, yetki ve sorumlulukları ile eğitim müfredatı üzerinde gerekli düzenlemelerin yapılması, obstetrik ultrason kurslarının düzenlenmesi, yapılan düzenlemeler ve verilen eğitimler sonucunda sahada çalışan ebelerin desteklenmesi ve denetlenmesi önerilmektedir.

Keywords

Ebelik, Ultrason, Obstetrik ultrason

Supporting Institution

Bulunmamaktadır.

Project Number

Bulunmamaktadır.

References

• 1. Taşkın L. Doğum ve kadın sağlığı hemşireliği. 13. baskı. Taşkın L, editör. Ankara: Akademisyen Tıp Kitabevi; 2016.
• 2. Alp DN, Ertem G. Fetal Sağlığın Değerlendirilmesi ve Tarama Testleri. In: Sevil Ü, Ertem G, editors. Perinatoloji ve Bakım. İzmir: Ankara Nobel Tıp Kitabevleri; 2016. pp:73-409.
• 3. Akça E, Sürücü ŞG, Akbaş M. Obstetrik ultrason kullanımının tarihçesine ilişkin bir değerlendirme ve ebenin rolü. Mersin Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Lokman Hekim Tıp Tarihi ve Folklorik Tıp Dergisi 2018;8(1):47-53.
• 4. Shaw-Battista J, et al. Interprofessional obstetric ultrasound education: Successful development of online learning modules; Case-based seminars and skills lobs for registered and advanced practice nurses, midwives, physicians and trainees. Journal of Midwifery&Women’s Health 2015;60 (6):659-61.
• 5. Kassebaum NJ, et al. Global, regional and national levels and causes of maternal mortality during 1990-2013: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. Lancet 2014;384(9947):980-1004.
• 6. Cantwell R, et al. Saving mothers’ lives: Reviewing maternal deaths to make motherhood safer: 2006-2008. The eighth report of the confidential enquiries into maternal deaths in the United Kingdom. BJOG 2011;118:1-203.
• 7. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu Başkanlığı (TUİK). Temel İstatistikler. [updated 2018 Dec 20; cited 2019 June 10] Available from:http://www.tuik.gov.tr/UstMenu.do?metod=kategorist. 8. The Millenium Development Goals. They are about children. [updated 2003 May; cited 2019 June 12]; Available from: https://www.unicef.org/publications/index_7947.html.
• 9. United Nations Millennium Declaration. NY, United Nations. [updated 2000 Sep 6-8; cited 2019 June 12]; Available from: http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration/ares552e.pdf.
• 10. Karahan N, editors. Türkiye’de ebe olmak. I. Uluslararası&II. Ulusal Ebelik Kongresi; 13 Ekim 2011; Türkiye. Safranbolu;2011.
• 11. Yurtsal ZB, et al. Sağlık Bilimleri Fakültesi ebelik 1. ve 4. sınıf öğrencilerinin mesleğe ilişkin görüşlerinin belirlenmesi. Erciyes Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi 2014;2(2):15-25.
• 12. Hogan MC, et al. Maternal mortality for 181 countries, 1980-2008: A systematic analysis of progress towards Millennium Development Goal 5. Lancet 2010;375:1609-23.
• 13. Kinnevey C, et al. Addressing obstetrical challenges at 12 rural Ugandan health facilities: Finding from an ınternational ultrasound and skills development training for midwives in Uganda. International Journal of MCH and AIDS 2016;5(1):46-52.
• 14. Vınayak S, et al. Traınıng mıdwıves to perform basıc obstetrıc poınt-of-care ultrasound ın rural areas usıng a tablet platform and mobıle phone transmıssıon technology-A WFUMB COE Project. Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology 2017;43(10):2125-32.
• 15. Holmlund S, et al. Health professionals’ experiences and views on obstetric ultrasound in Rwanda: A cross-sectional study. Plos One 2018;13(12):1-20.
• 16. Fullerton J, et al. Global competencies for midwives: External cephalic version; Ultrasonography and tobacco cessation intervention. Women and Birth 2019;32:413-20.
• 17. Campbell S, Little D. Clinical potential of real-time ultrasound. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications 1980.
• 18. Oakley A. The history of ultrasonography in obstetrics. Birth 1986;13:5.
• 19. Wagner M. Ultrasound: more harm than good? Midwifery Today 1999;28-30.
• 20. Midwifery Journals&Literature Search Services (NICE). Antenatal care for uncomplicated pregnancies. [updated 2008 March 26; cited 2019 June 10]; Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg62/chapter/1-Guidance#screening-for-fetal-anomalies. 21. World Health Organization (WHO): Maternal mortality. [updated 2008 March 26; cited 2019 June 10]; Available from: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs348/en/.
• 22. Ekşioğlu A, et al. Doğum öncesi bakım. In: Soğukpınar N, Karaca Saydam B, editors. Fetal sağlığın değerlendirilmesi. Ankara: Vize Basın Yayın;2018.pp:229-59.
• 23. Okumuş F. Travay dönemindeki ebelik mesleğinin keyifli doğumu. Sağlık Düşüncesi ve Tıp Kültürü Dergisi 2011;32:54-7.
• 24. Kawooya MG, et al. Impact of ıntroducing routine antenatal ultrasound services on reproductive health ındicators in mpigi district, central Uganda. Ultrasound Q 2015;31(4):285–89.
• 25. Allan A, et al. Comparing ultrasound and nevre stimulation: Time to ask the question? Anaesthesia 2011;66(3):222-3.
• 26. Edvardsson K, et al. A routine tool with far-reaching influence: Australian midwives’ views on the use of ultrasound during pregnancy. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 2015;15:195.
• 27. Stein W, Katunda I, Butoto C. A two-level ultrasonographic service in a maternity care unit of a rural district hospital in Tanzania. Trop Doct 2008;38(2):125–26.
• 28. Kimberly HH, et al. Focused maternal ultrasound by midwives in rural Zambia. Ultrasound Med Biol 2010;36(8):1267–72.
• 29. American Registry for Diagnostic Medical Sonography. How to Apply Guide. [updated 2020; cited 2020 May 06]; Available from: https://www.ardms.org/wp-content/uploads/pdf/ARDMS-HTAG-online.pdf
• 30. American College of Nurse-Midwives. Ultrasound in Midwifery Practice. [updated 2018 Oct; cited cited 2020 May 10]; Available from: http://www.midwife.org/acnm/files/acnmlibrarydata/uploadfilename/000000000318/Ultrasound-in-Midwifery-Practice-FINAL-11-24-18.pdf
• 31. Regulated Health Professions Act. Ontarıo Regulatıon 107/96 Controlled Acts. [updated 2020 Apr 01; cited 2020 May 10]; Tarih:19.12.2017, Sayı:296/04. Available from: https://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/960107/v9Ontarıo
• 32. The Society and College of Radıographers and British Medical Ultrasound Society. Guidelines for Professional Ultrasound Practice. [updated 2015 Dec; cited 2020 May 10]; Available from: https://www.bmus.org/static/uploads/resources/GUIDELINES_FOR_PROFESSIONAL_ULTRASOUND_PRACTICE.pdf
• 33. National Collaborating Centre for Women’s and Children’s Health. Antenatal care routine car efor the healthy pregnant woman. [updated 2008 Mar; cited 2020 May 06]; Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK51886/pdf/Bookshelf_NBK51886.pdf
• 34. The International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. ISUOG Practice Guidelines: intrapartum ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2018;52:128-39.
• 35. Meaney S, et al. Planned home births in Ireland Annual Report 2016; HSE National Home Birth Service provided by Self Employed Community Midwives. Health Services Executive, 2018.
• 36. Hanafin S, O’Reilly ED. National and International review of literature on models of care across selected jurisdictions to inform the development of a National Strategy for Maternity Services in Ireland. Research Matters.
• 37. John-Arne R, et al. Routine Ultrasound examination in pregnancy. Institution National Knowledge Center for Health Services 2008.
• 38. UL6000 Further education in ultrasound diagnostics for midwives. [Internet]. Norveç: ACNM Ultrasound Education, Inc.; [updated 2020 May 05]. Available from: https://www.ntnu.no/videre/gen/-/courses/nv14232
• 39. Ahman A, et al. A much valued tool that also brings ethical dilemmas: A qualitative study of Norwegian midwives’ experiences and view a the role of obstetric ultrasound. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 2019;19(1):33.
• 40. Peterson K. The Swedish Maternal Health Care Register: Internal Validity, User Perspectives and Register Outcomes; and Experiences by Midwives in Antenatal Care. Department of Clinical Sciences Obstetrics and Gynecology Umea 2016.
• 41. Edvardsson K, et al. Increasing possibilities-Increasing dilemmas: A qualitative study of Swedish midwives’ experiences of ultrasound use in pregnancy. Midwifery 42 2016;42:46-53.
• 42. Jansson C, Adolfsson A. A Swedish study of midwives’ and nurses’ experiences when women are diagnosed with a missed miscarriage during a routine ultrasound scan. Sexual&Reproductive Halthcare 1 2010;1(2):67-72.
• 43. Eurenıus K, et al. Second trimester ultrasound screening performed by midwives; Sensitivity for detection of fetal anomalies. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1999; 78(2):98-104.
• 44. Havukumpu J, et al. Midwives experiences of using HMD in ultrasound scan. NordiCHI 2006;369-72.
• 45. Karttunen P, Vallimies-Patomaki M. A new sunt for boiler training. Ministry of Education and Culture Working Group Memos and Reports 2015:11.
• 46. Moria D. Ministry of health New Zealand obstetric ultrasound guidelines 2019 consultation. New Zealand College of Midwives 2019;1-5.
• 47. New Zealand College of Midwives. Ministry of Health New Zealand Obstetric Ultrasound Guidelines 2019 Consultation. [updated 2019 May 03; cited 2020 May 05]; Available from: https://consult.health.govt.nz/nsu/obstetric-ultrasound-guidelines/
• 48. The Royal Dutch Organisatıon of Mıdwıves. Midwifery in the Netherlands 2012. [updated 2017 Jan; cited 2020 May 06]; Available from: http://www.europeanmidwives.com/upload/filemanager/content-galleries/national-guidelines/KNOV_Midwifery_in_the_Netherlands_20121112.pdf
• 49. The Royal Dutch Organisatıon of Mıdwıves. Midwifery in the Netherlands 2017. [updated 2013 Sep 25; cited 2020 May 05]; Available from: https://www.knov.nl/serve/file/knov.nl/knov_downloads/526/file/Midwifery_in_The_Netherlands_versie_2017.pdf
• 50. Unno N. The perinatal care system in Japan. JMAJ 2011;54(4):234-40.
• 51. Japanese Nursing Association. Midwifery ın Japan. [updated 2018; cited 2020 May 07]; Available from: https://www.nurse.or.jp/jna/english/midwifery/pdf/mij2018.pdf
• 52. Dolo O, et al. Training of midwives in advanced obstetrics in Liberia. Bull World Health Organ 2016;94:383-387.
• 53. Coşkun A. Hemşireler ve ebeler için kadın sağlığı ve hastalıkları öğrenim rehberi. 1. Baskı, Coşkun A, editors. İstanbul: Nobel Tıp Kitabevi; 2013.
• 54. Beji NK, Dişsiz, M. Gebelikte sağlığın değerlendirilmesi ve klinik karar verme. In: Aslan F, editors. Sağlığın değerlendirilmesi ve klinik karar verme. Ankara: Akademisyen Tıp Kitabevi; 2017.pp:745-7.
• 55. Taş F, ve ark. Kadın doğum ve çocuk hastanesinde doğum yapan kadınların doğum öncesi bakım alma durumu. KSÜ Tıp Fak Der 2019;14(1):24-30.
• 56. Yücel U, ve ark. İzmir’in Bornova ilçesinin üç semtinde yaşayan gebelerin doğum öncesi bakım hizmetlerinden yararlanma düzeyi. TAT Preventive Medicine Bulletin 2015;14(5):370-377
• 57. Yılmaz L, Koruk F, Koruk İ. Şanlıurfa’da bir devlet hastanesinde doğum yapmış kadınların doğum öncesi bakım hizmetlerini alma durumu, bu hizmetlerin niteliği ve etkileyen faktörler. Mersin Üniv Sağlık Bilim Dergisi 2018;11(2):209-18.
• 58. Gözlü M, Tatlıdil H. Türkiye’deki 81 ilin kamu tarafından sunulan sağlık hizmetlerine erişim durumları. Sosyal Güvenlik Dergisi 2015;5(2):145-65.
• 59. Van Adrichem A, et al. Intrapartum ultrasound: Viewpoint of midwives and parturient women and reproducibility. International Journal of Women’s Health 2018;10:251-56.
• 60. Capmas P, et al. Using Z-scores to compare biometry data obtained during prenatal ultrasound screening by midwives and physicians. Prenatal Diagnosıs 2010;30(1):40-42.
• 61. Mattsson N, Rosendahl H, Luukkaala T. Good accuracy of ultrasound estimations of fetal weight perform by midwives. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica 2007;86(6):688-92.
• 62. Swanson JO, et al. The diagnostic impact of limited, screening obstetric ultrasound when performed by midwives in rural Uganda. J Perinatol 2014;34(7):508–12.
• 63. Lalor FG, Devane D. Information, knowledge and expectations of the routine ultrasound scan. Midwifery 2007;23(1):13-22.