1. Progesterone Audit Shilpa Joshi SpR Chemical Pathology
Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust

2. Background
It was noticed by the staff in Clinical Chemistry at Royal Devon and Exeter Foundation
Trust, that there was increase in serum progesterone requests over the last couple of years
Many had either very little or no clinical details provided

3. At around the same time, The Royal College of Pathologists published in their July 2011
Bulletin:
‘Audit of progesterone requesting in pregnancy of unknown location, June 2009’ carried out at Kingston Hospital NHS Trust

4. That audit evaluated the nature of requests for progesterone (apart from fertility invsg.)
They developed local guidance for requesting progesterone in PUL, wherein progesterone
was only needed where serum β-HCG was not declining as expected
They developed a software rule to block requests from in- patient admissions/ A&E ,
which did not have a β-HCG request on the same patients in the past 20 days

5. A re audit by the same department in February 2011 (published in the same bulletin) showed a remarkable reduction of 93% in serum progesterone tests being analysed
They demonstrated an annual cost saving of £830 on progesterone
As a result we decided to audit our local progesterone requesting pattern

6. Local RDE protocol for management of PUL
Progesterone (nmol/L) β-HCG (IU/L)
< > Spontaneous resolving pregnancy, check β-
HCG in 7 days
> Miscarriage/Ectopic with moderate
intervention, β-HCG in 2 days.
> < Normal intrauterine pregnancy, repeat
scan β-HCG >1000
> > Ectopic pregnancy with high risk requiring
intervention, scan same day

7. Role of placenta and progesterone in early pregnancy
Corpus Luteum (Ovaries)
secrete
Progesterone
maintains foetal viability
Foetus + Placenta signal

8. Aim
To examine and compare serum progesterone requests received by the Department of Clinical Chemistry, RDE, in months February and March in the years 2008 and 2011
To be in a position to draft and publish some local guidelines for requesting serum progesterone.

9. Method
Encore data extraction software was used to obtain serum progesterone requests in the
months Feb-March in the years 2008 and 2011
Only those progesterones which had an accompanying β-HCG were included in the
audit ( serum progesterones requested for investigation/ monitoring of infertility were not included)

10. Number of progesterones requested in two months in 2008 and 2011

11. In X1=68 13X2=26 2X3= 6 83 women = 100 requests in 2 months In X1=139 15X2=30 2X3=6 156 women = 175 requests in 2 months (A progesterone was erroneously added to a male patient’s test profile by the laboratory which was not included in the current audit)

12. Distribution of progesterone requests in ( ) females according to age groups in Feb-March 2008 &2011
The women ranged from ages years in 2008 and years in 2011.

13. Requests in 2008 and 2011 stratified according to departments

14. A&E requests in 2008 & 2011

15. Clinical reasons for requesting serum progesterone in 83 women in Feb-March 2008 and 156 women in Feb-Mar 2011
Feb-Mar 2008
(Total=83)
Feb-Mar
2011(Total=156)
MONITORING TREATMENT IN INFERTILITY 12 5
? ECTOPIC ? MISCARRIAGE
3 (3.6%)
11 (7%)
?ECTOPIC INCLUDING ABDOMINAL PAIN IN
PREGNANCY
36 (43.3%)
45 (28.8%)
ECTOPIC 3
? MISCARRIAGE /PV BLEEDING IN PREGNANCY
15 (18%)
47 (30.1%)
MISCARRIAGE 2
THREATENED MISCARRIAGE
INCONCLUSIVE SCAN IN PREGNANCY 11
ABDO PAIN OTHERWISE
MOLAR PREGNANCY DIAGNOSED 1
PV BLEEDING OTHERWISE
RETAINED PRODUCTS
0 (0%)
8 (5%)
?PREGNANT/ PREGNANT 6
NCD 7

16. Clinical scenarios where the local RDE protocol for management of PUL can be applied
2008 (44)
2011 (67)
? ECTOPIC ? MISCARRIAGE 3 11
?ECTOPIC INCLUDING ABDOMINAL PAIN IN 36 45
PREGNANCY
INCONCLUSIVE SCAN IN PREGNANCY 5

17. Classification of the above cases according to the local RDE protocol for management of PUL
?Ectopic / PUL in 2008/ cases (2008) + 52 cases (2011) had a single progesterone 11cases (2008) + 15 cases (2011) had more than one progesterone Baseline progesterone + β-HCG Prog. β-HCG Prog. β-HCG <16 >25 Spont. resolving pregnancy, β- HCG in 7 days >25 Miscarriage/Ectopic with moderate intervention, β-HCG in 2 days. 6 (2008) + 3 (2011) 4 (2008) + 8 (2011) Prog. β-HCG Prog. β-HCG >60 <1000 Normal intrauterine pregnancy, repeat scan >60 >1000 Ectopic pregnancy with high risk β- HCG >1000 requiring intervention, scan same day 1 (2011) 1 (2008) + 3 (2011)

18. Progesterone (nmol/L) β-HCG (IU/L)
< > Spontaneous resolving pregnancy, check β-
HCG in 7 days
6 cases (2008) of which women miscarried, 2 had decreasing β-
HCG with unknown outcomes
3 cases (2011) of which woman was diagnosed with ectopic, 2
had decreasing β-HCG with unknown
outcomes

19. Progesterone (nmol/L) β-HCG (IU/L)
> Miscarriage/Ectopic with moderate
intervention, β-HCG in 2 days
4 cases (2008) of which women went to full term, 2 had decreasing β-
HCG with unknown outcomes
8 cases (2011) of which women went to full term, 1 had ectopic, 2
miscarried, 3 had decreasing β-HCG with
unknown outcomes

20. Progesterone (nmol/L) β-HCG (IU/L)
> < Normal intrauterine pregnancy, repeat scan
β-HCG >1000
1 case (2011) β-HCG not doubling, Ectopic

21. Progesterone (nmol/L) β-HCG (IU/L)
> > Ectopic pregnancy with high risk requiring
intervention, scan same day
1 case (2008) which went on to have a full term pregnancy
3 cases (2011) of which had full term pregnancy, whilst the
other 2 miscarried,

22. Clinical reasons (excluding investigation for infertility/ threatened miscarriage) for analysing progesterones, which do not fulfil the local PUL algorithm
Feb-Mar 2008
(Total= 27 )
Feb-Mar
2011(Total= 81)
ECTOPIC 3
? MISCARRIAGE /PV BLEEDING IN PREGNANCY 15 47
MISCARRIAGE 2
ABDO PAIN OTHERWISE
MOLAR PREGNANCY DIAGNOSED 1
PV BLEEDING OTHERWISE
RETAINED PRODUCTS 8
?PREGNANT/ PREGNANT 6
NCD 7 12

23. Conclusions 2008/2011
The audit evaluated a total of 100 serum progesterone tests in Feb-March 2008 and 175
in Feb-March 2011
239 different patients in months of Feb-March 2008 & 2011 had a total of 275
progesterone tests

24. There was increase in progesterone requests by 75% in 2011 compared to 2008
The major requestor was OBGYN 83/100 (83%) in 2008 and 134/ 175 (76.5%) in 2011
The main reasons for requesting the test was ? Ectopic pregnancy and ? Miscarriage / PV bleeding in pregnancy

25. Perhaps the algorithm for PUL is being utilised indiscriminately in other clinical
scenarios, 32.5% (2008) , 51.9% (2011)
In 2008, 10 cases (4 OBGYN+5 GP+1 UNK) had a progesterone requested even though
the baseline β-HCG <1. Out these 7 cases were for querying ectopic pregnancy
In 2011, 21 cases ( 8GP + 2A&E OBGYN ) had a serum progesterone even though
baseline β-HCG demonstrated that the patients were not pregnant
A&E continues to order baseline β-HCG +Progesterone in high proportions

26. Limitations of the audit
It was tricky to evaluate the suitability of the test requests exclusively on the basis of
the clinical details available on PTH, which were often insufficient
The level of seniority of medical staff requesting progesterones could not be verified , as
samples were booked under the consultant leading the team

27. Request forms from A&E have A&E consultant names printed on the forms, therefore,
samples from A&E may have been requested by other departments
Also, in cases where progesterone/ β-HCG added at a later time, it was difficult to know
the team requesting these tests as samples were booked under A&E
Currently there is no clear guidance regarding the clinical conditions meriting a serum
progesterone

28. Recommendations
Liaise with OBGYN to encourage use of the PUL algorithm only in those conditions
which fit the criteria, and, discourage use in other clinical scenarios
Serum progesterone to be not analysed in situations where no clinical/ irrelevant
clinical details provided
Re audit data probably in a year

29. References
The management of early pregnancy loss (green-top guideline no.25, October 2006): Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologist
Audit of progesterone requesting in pregnancy of unknown location, June 2009: The Royal College of Pathologist Bulletin, July 2011, pg
Expectant management of ectopic pregnancy (revised Feb2010), Guidelines by Child and Women’s Health, Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Trust
Donna Day Baird, Clarice R. Weinberg, D. Robert McConnaughey, and Allen J. Wilcox Rescue of the Corpus Luteum in Human Pregnancy Biol Reprod February (2)

30. Acknowledgement
Dr O’Connor/ Dr Salzmann

31. Thank you