BackgroundWhile many women and infants have an uneventful course during the postpartum period, others experience significant morbidity. Effective postpartum care in the community can prevent short, medium and long-term consequences of unrecognised and poorly managed problems. The use of rigorously developed, evidence-based guidelines has the potential to improve patient care, impact on policy and ensure consistency of care across health sectors. This study aims to compare the scope and content, and assess the quality of clinical guidelines about routine postpartum care in primary care.MethodsPubMed, the National Guideline Clearing House, Google, Google Scholar and relevant college websites were searched for relevant guidelines. All guidelines regarding routine postpartum care published in English between 2002 and 2012 were considered and screened using explicit selection criteria. The scope and recommendations contained in the guidelines were compared and the quality of the guidelines was independently assessed by two authors using the AGREE II instrument.ResultsSix guidelines from Australia (2), the United Kingdom (UK) (3) and the United States of America (USA) (1), were included. The scope of the guidelines varied greatly. However, guideline recommendations were generally consistent except for the use of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale for mood disorder screening and the suggested time of routine visits. Some recommendations lacked evidence to support them, and levels or grades of evidence varied between guidelines. The quality of most guidelines was adequate. Of the six AGREE II domains, applicability and editorial independence scored the lowest, and scope, purpose and clarity of presentation scored the highest.ConclusionsOnly one guideline provided comprehensive recommendations for the care of postpartum women and their infants. As well as considering the need for region specific guidelines, further research is needed to strengthen the evidence supporting recommendations made within guidelines. Further improvement in the editorial independence and applicability domains of the AGREE ll criteria would strengthen the quality of the guidelines.

Introduction: In the last 5 years, there has been a significant focus on the use of positron emission tomography (PET) for primary and secondary staging of prostate cancer. In this study, we aim to describe the trends of use between Gallium-68 prostate-specific membrane antigen ligand (Ga-68 PSMA) PET/ computed tomography (PSMA PET/CT) and nuclear medicine bone scan (NMBS) for prostate cancer staging in the first institution in Australia to offer both modalities. Methods: We evaluated trends in prostate cancer staging/restaging imaging modalities at our facility between the time period January 2013-April 2018. Imaging logs were filtered to identify NMBS and PSMA PET/CT scans done within the time period for prostate cancer. Sub-analysis was undertaken (i) to investigate the number of patients who were imaged using both modalities, (ii) to compare the age of the patients in the NMBS group and the PSMA PET/ CT group and (iii) to compare the use of PSMA PET/CT for pre-treatment staging compared to the detection of recurrence or metastatic disease (secondary staging). Results: A total of 3144 examinations were performed in the time period reviewed, with 546 NMBS and 2598 PSMA PET/CT scans performed. In the 6 months after PSMA PET/CT was introduced, there was a 45.7% decrease in the number of NMBS performed and 95.3% decrease across the duration of the study. In the PSMA PET/CT cohort, 1569 examinations were performed for pre-treatment staging and 1029 performed for secondary staging. There was a significant difference in the proportion of PSMA PET/CT conducted for pretreatment staging compared with secondary staging when comparing the first and final 500 examinations (P < 0.05). Conclusion: After the introduction of PSMA PET/CT there was a marked decline in the use of NMBS for prostate cancer staging. This finding is of note as it occurred before there was clinical data or guidelines supporting the use of PSMA PET/CT for prostate cancer imaging.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract