Hyperemesis gravidarum (HG) is a condition characterized by severe, intractable nausea and vomiting in early pregnancy. It affects about 0.3–2% of all pregnancies and is thought that HG is a multifactorial disease resulting from the combination of various unrelated conditions such as genetic, hormonal and psychiatric. Although there are studies investigating the relationship between anxiety, depression and HG; however, none have sufficiently clarified this link. The aim of this prospective case–control study was to investigate the possible relationship between depression and HG and compare the prevalence of depression disorders in pregnant women with and without HG.A prospective case–control study was performed at our tertiary referral centre between December 2013 and July 2014. The study group consisted of 78 pregnant women with HG and the control group consisted of 82 healthy pregnant women who never had experienced any nausea and vomiting. No study participants had any pre-pregnancy history of any psychiatric disorder including depression. Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnostic (SCID-I) and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) was used to evaluate symptoms of depression. Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) was administered to patients during the psychiatric interview and was evaluated by the same psychiatrist.The mean BDI scores in HG study and healthy control groups were 18.97 ± 9.85 and 6.36 ± 5.61, respectively (p < 0.001). Among the 78 women in the HG study population, 42 (53.9%) of patients had moderate or severe depression disorder. Only 6.1% of patients in the control group had moderate or severe depression.In conclusion, the findings of this study indicated that psychological distress associated with HG was a direct consequence rather than a cause of HG. Therefore, patients with HG during pregnancy should be evaluated with respect to mood disorders as much as their medical conditions.

ObjectiveFear of pain during intrauterine device (IUD) insertion can be a barrier to widespread use of this safe and highly effective contraceptive method. Our objective was to determine the effectiveness of topical 10% lidocaine spray for pain control during IUD insertion.MethodsA total of 200 subjects with the request for IUD insertion were included in the study. The patients were randomly divided into two groups: lidocaine spray (n=100) and placebo (n=100). The pain experienced during the procedure was measured immediately after insertion by a standard Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) administered by a separate researcher with maintenance of allocation concealment.ResultsThe mean pain score during the procedure was 1.01±1.20 in the lidocaine spray group and 3.23±1.60 in the placebo spray group (p<0.001). Lidocaine spray treatment significantly lowered the overall procedural pain score compared with placebo.ConclusionsSignificant pain reduction during IUD insertion can be achieved by using 10% lidocaine spray alone. Lidocaine spray can be accepted as a non-invasive, easy to apply and more comfortable local anaesthetic method for IUD insertion.Trial registration numberNCT02020551.

No abstract

The only fetal sonographic measurement found to significantly differ between the study groups was the AAWT in 26 weeks at the time of gestational diabetes screening, suggesting that measuring the AAWT may have a role in the evaluation of fetal growth in pregnancies complicated by gestational diabetes.

Maternal obesity decreases the accuracy of sonographic fetal weight estimation. Clinicians should be aware of the limitations of sonographic fetal weight estimation, especially in obese patients.