Obstetrician-gynecologists (ob-gyns) are well-positioned to detect symptoms of perinatal depression; however, little is known about how ob-gyns respond. The purpose of this study was to evaluate ob-gyns' beliefs and practices related to prenatal depression screening and antidepressant prescription during pregnancy. A larger survey on prenatal medication was developed at the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and distributed to a sample of 1000 Fellows. The overall response rate was 37.9% (N = 379). Two hundred eighty-eight provided care to pregnant patients and therefore, responded to questions on prenatal depression screening and antidepressant prescription. Most ob-gyns (87.8%) routinely screened patients for depression at least once during pregnancy. When symptoms of depression were reported, 52.1% "sometimes" prescribed an antidepressant medication with 22.5% doing so "usually or always". While 84.0% prescribed selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) to pregnant patients, only 31.9% prescribed non-SSRIs. Ob-gyns felt comfortable prescribing SSRIs (78.1%) and counseled patients that the benefits of treating depression pharmacologically outweigh the risks (83.0%), and the use of SSRIs during pregnancy is relatively safe (87.5%). Prescribing SSRIs to pregnant patients was not significantly associated with interpretation of evidence on fetal and neonatal outcomes. Findings suggest most ob-gyns in the USA at least sometimes prescribe antidepressants in response to patient reports of depression symptoms during pregnancy. Mixed interpretations of evidence regarding the effects of SSRIs on fetal and neonatal outcomes reflect a critical need for high-quality safety data upon which to base treatment recommendations.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to document current awareness, attitudes, and training regarding the care of women with disabilities by obstetrician–gynecologists (ob-gyns) and explore barriers that may explain observed discrepancies in care.Methods: One thousand ob-gyns, including 500 members of the Collaborative Ambulatory Research Network (CARN), were surveyed on practice accessibility, training, awareness, barriers, beliefs, comfort, challenges, practices, contraceptive counseling, and preconception/pregnancy counseling.Results: CARN, 49.0%, and non-CARN, 19.4%, members completed the survey for an overall response rate of 33.9%. Most respondents indicated feeling “somewhat” (57.5%) or “very” (21.9%) aware of the special healthcare needs of women with disabilities. Only 17.2%, however, received any information or training on the provision of healthcare to women with disabilities. Eighty-one percent agreed somewhat or strongly that women with disabilities are less likely to receive comprehensive reproductive healthcare. Respondents who provided contraceptive counseling (94.3%) initiated it with women of reproductive age who did not have a disability more frequently than those who had a disability. Finally, only 19.3% felt “definitely” adequately equipped to manage the pregnancies of women with disabilities.Conclusion: Women with disabilities require reproductive healthcare no less than women without disabilities; however, the evidence consistently identifies disparities. This study suggests that while ob-gyn providers are aware of these issues, they lack adequate training and resources to provide equal care.