Fetal gender disclosure, a non-medical prenatal ultrasonography indication, although largely ethically unjustifiable, continues to grow and thrive in demand due to its request by pregnant women. The study aims at establishing the proportion of women who want to know fetal gender during prenatal ultrasound. This was twelve months` prospective study of all pregnant women, 16weeks and above who presented at our facility for antenatal ultrasound in Makurdi from 7th May 2019 to 6th May 2020. A structured questionnaire was used to obtain information on factors influencing their willingness to know the gender of their unborn children. The information collated was entered into statistical package for social science (SPSS) version 23.0 for analysis. P-values=0.005 was considered significant for the study population. Two hundred and fifty (250) pregnant women were recruited for the study. Majority of the women 233(93.2%) showed marked interest in knowing the gender of the fetus, while 17(6.8%) did not. The main reason for wanting to know the sex of the fetus was for easier choice of clothing and naming; whereas the main reason for not wanting sex disclosure was because any child is good. There was no statistically significant correlation between gender preferences and the other variables such as age, educational attainment, tribe and previous miscarriages (P=0.136, 0.485, 0.275 and 0.942 respectively). Majority of the women 233(93.2%) want fetal gender disclosure due to ease of choice of clothing and naming. The deliberate policy of non-disclosure on account of non-medical indication during prenatal ultrasonography is untenable in our environment.

Background: Despite the restricted diagnostic imaging knowledge, perceptions, and practices of non-radiologist physicians, the significance of radiology in establishing and verifying diagnoses in medicine is expanding globally. We aimed to evaluate existing diagnostic imaging knowledge, perceptions, and practices among referring non-radiologist physicians, identify aspects that are beneficial but substantially inconsistent, and determine those that can be improved.Methods: A 3-month cross-sectional study, utilizing structured questionnaire, was responded to by physicians at Benue State University Teaching Hospital (BSUTH), Makurdi. Descriptive statistics were used for the statistical analysis and results presented as tables and figures. Statistical significance was determined at p=0.05.Results: We recruited 137 physicians, aged 26 to 52 years, consisting of 111 (81.0%) males and 26 (19.0%) females. Majority,79 (57.7%) of respondents did not know which imaging modality; chest computed tomography (CT-chest) or chest X-rays (CXR), presented higher ionizing radiation hazards. Few 54 (39.4%) desired the radiologists’ lifestyle, while less than half 62 (45.3%) believed that any referral involving radiation risks should be justified. The ratings for diagnostic imaging knowledge, perceptions and practices were consecutively excellent, 124 (90.5%), optimistic 5 (3.6%) and healthy 19 (13.9%). No statistically significant correlations were found between knowledge and perceptions, knowledge and practices, or perceptions and imaging practices.Conclusions: Non-radiologist physicians demonstrated excellent knowledge but pessimistic perceptions and unhealthy imaging practices. A misconception existed over which modality, CT-chest or CXR, presented greater radiation risks. A few desired the radiologists’ lifestyles while a minority sought justification for radiation-risky investigations. These aspects were beneficial but inconsistent, necessitating improvements through multidisciplinary clinical interactions.

Though Klippel-Feil syndrome is a rare congenital anomaly and the clinical presentations are varied, a complete history, physical and radiological examinations may reveal the diagnosis.