Stacey B Griner, Malinee Neelamegam, Kaeli Johnson, Ashlyn Kinard, Alexandra N Farris, Amanda Brosnan, Meaghan Nelsen
{"title":"产前梅毒筛查指南的认识、接受和采用。","authors":"Stacey B Griner, Malinee Neelamegam, Kaeli Johnson, Ashlyn Kinard, Alexandra N Farris, Amanda Brosnan, Meaghan Nelsen","doi":"10.1177/15409996251382057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Background:</i></b> Congenital syphilis rates have been increasing since 2012 and are associated with adverse health outcomes. There is variability in screening guidelines, and little is known about provider knowledge of them. The purpose was to assess the awareness and acceptability of prenatal syphilis guidelines among physicians. <b><i>Materials and Methods:</i></b> We cross-sectionally assessed prenatal provider (MD/DO; <i>n</i> = 201) awareness and adoption of national guidelines. Feasibility was assessed through the feasibility of the intervention measure, acceptability using the acceptability of the intervention measure, and appropriateness using the intervention appropriateness measure. Each measure included four items on a five-point Likert scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). The final analysis compared relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, observability, and trialability across the guidelines. Data analysis was completed in SAS v9.4, and this study was approved by the university's IRB. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Providers discussed (84%) and recommended (91%) prenatal syphilis screening to their patients. Providers (87%) were aware of their professional organizations' prenatal syphilis screening recommendations and utilized the American Academy of Pediatrics/American Congress of Obstetrics and Gynecology guideline (74%). Universal screening (62%), pregnancy trimester (54%), and professional organizations' recommended guidelines (54%) were associated with recommending syphilis screening to prenatal patients. The most important factor was universal screening (33%). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guideline had the highest mean relative advantage score (3.56, <i>p</i> = 0.020), and the United States Preventive Services Task Force guideline was viewed as significantly clearer (9.76) compared to the other guidelines (<i>p</i> = 0.007). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Participants discussed and recommended prenatal syphilis screening to their patients despite variability in screening guidelines. Future studies should analyze guideline dissemination to fully understand the adoption process.</p>","PeriodicalId":520699,"journal":{"name":"Journal of women's health (2002)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Awareness, Acceptability, and Adoption of Prenatal Syphilis Screening Guidelines.\",\"authors\":\"Stacey B Griner, Malinee Neelamegam, Kaeli Johnson, Ashlyn Kinard, Alexandra N Farris, Amanda Brosnan, Meaghan Nelsen\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15409996251382057\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b><i>Background:</i></b> Congenital syphilis rates have been increasing since 2012 and are associated with adverse health outcomes. There is variability in screening guidelines, and little is known about provider knowledge of them. The purpose was to assess the awareness and acceptability of prenatal syphilis guidelines among physicians. <b><i>Materials and Methods:</i></b> We cross-sectionally assessed prenatal provider (MD/DO; <i>n</i> = 201) awareness and adoption of national guidelines. Feasibility was assessed through the feasibility of the intervention measure, acceptability using the acceptability of the intervention measure, and appropriateness using the intervention appropriateness measure. Each measure included four items on a five-point Likert scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). The final analysis compared relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, observability, and trialability across the guidelines. Data analysis was completed in SAS v9.4, and this study was approved by the university's IRB. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Providers discussed (84%) and recommended (91%) prenatal syphilis screening to their patients. Providers (87%) were aware of their professional organizations' prenatal syphilis screening recommendations and utilized the American Academy of Pediatrics/American Congress of Obstetrics and Gynecology guideline (74%). Universal screening (62%), pregnancy trimester (54%), and professional organizations' recommended guidelines (54%) were associated with recommending syphilis screening to prenatal patients. The most important factor was universal screening (33%). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guideline had the highest mean relative advantage score (3.56, <i>p</i> = 0.020), and the United States Preventive Services Task Force guideline was viewed as significantly clearer (9.76) compared to the other guidelines (<i>p</i> = 0.007). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Participants discussed and recommended prenatal syphilis screening to their patients despite variability in screening guidelines. Future studies should analyze guideline dissemination to fully understand the adoption process.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520699,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of women's health (2002)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of women's health (2002)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15409996251382057\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of women's health (2002)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15409996251382057","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:自2012年以来,先天性梅毒发病率一直在上升,并与不良健康结局相关。筛查指南各不相同,对提供者的了解也很少。目的是评估医生对产前梅毒指南的认识和接受程度。材料和方法:我们横断面评估了产前提供者(MD/DO; n = 201)对国家指南的认识和采用情况。可行性通过干预措施的可行性,可接受性通过干预措施的可接受性,适当性通过干预措施的适当性来评估。每项测量都包括李克特五分制的四个项目,从非常不同意(1)到非常同意(5)。最后的分析比较了指南的相对优势、兼容性、复杂性、可观察性和可试验性。数据分析在SAS v9.4中完成,本研究得到了大学IRB的批准。结果:提供者讨论(84%)并推荐(91%)患者进行产前梅毒筛查。提供者(87%)了解其专业组织的产前梅毒筛查建议,并使用美国儿科学会/美国妇产科大会指南(74%)。普遍筛查(62%)、妊娠期筛查(54%)和专业组织推荐指南(54%)与向产前患者推荐梅毒筛查相关。最重要的因素是普遍筛查(33%)。疾病控制和预防中心的指南具有最高的平均相对优势得分(3.56,p = 0.020),与其他指南相比,美国预防服务工作组的指南被认为明显更清晰(9.76)(p = 0.007)。结论:尽管筛查指南存在差异,但参与者讨论并建议患者进行产前梅毒筛查。未来的研究应分析指南的传播,以充分了解指南的采用过程。
Awareness, Acceptability, and Adoption of Prenatal Syphilis Screening Guidelines.
Background: Congenital syphilis rates have been increasing since 2012 and are associated with adverse health outcomes. There is variability in screening guidelines, and little is known about provider knowledge of them. The purpose was to assess the awareness and acceptability of prenatal syphilis guidelines among physicians. Materials and Methods: We cross-sectionally assessed prenatal provider (MD/DO; n = 201) awareness and adoption of national guidelines. Feasibility was assessed through the feasibility of the intervention measure, acceptability using the acceptability of the intervention measure, and appropriateness using the intervention appropriateness measure. Each measure included four items on a five-point Likert scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). The final analysis compared relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, observability, and trialability across the guidelines. Data analysis was completed in SAS v9.4, and this study was approved by the university's IRB. Results: Providers discussed (84%) and recommended (91%) prenatal syphilis screening to their patients. Providers (87%) were aware of their professional organizations' prenatal syphilis screening recommendations and utilized the American Academy of Pediatrics/American Congress of Obstetrics and Gynecology guideline (74%). Universal screening (62%), pregnancy trimester (54%), and professional organizations' recommended guidelines (54%) were associated with recommending syphilis screening to prenatal patients. The most important factor was universal screening (33%). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guideline had the highest mean relative advantage score (3.56, p = 0.020), and the United States Preventive Services Task Force guideline was viewed as significantly clearer (9.76) compared to the other guidelines (p = 0.007). Conclusions: Participants discussed and recommended prenatal syphilis screening to their patients despite variability in screening guidelines. Future studies should analyze guideline dissemination to fully understand the adoption process.