Search

Background: This study compared clinical and financial outcomes for low‐risk birthing people between those attended by midwives and those attended by obstetricians during hospital births. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of births from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2020 at hospitals participating in a perinatal quality improvement collaborative, Obstetrical Care Outcomes Assessment Program (OB COAP), in the Northwest region of the United States and estimated risk ratios using a multivariate regression approach with a modified Poisson binomial for mode of delivery, labor interventions, and newborn outcomes comparing midwife‐led to obstetrician‐led care. Using publicly available data on average costs of vaginal and cesarean births, we then extrapolated the cost differences in care between midwives and obstetricians. Results: Births in the midwife group were less likely to be associated with induction (17.6% vs. 20.3% RR 0.74; 95% CI 0.70–0.78), epidural use (58.9% vs. 76.3% RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.77–0.80), and episiotomy (2.2% vs. 3.4% RR 0.68; 95% CI 0.58–0.81). Cesarean birth was also lower in the midwifery group (7.8% vs. 12.3% RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.62–0.73), without a corresponding increase in risk in adverse neonatal outcomes. We estimated that expanding midwifery care to 100% of low‐risk births across the United States could save as much as $340 million per year. Conclusions: Midwifery care is associated with a lower risk of cesarean birth and other interventions versus care provided by obstetricians and is therefore likely lower‐cost. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rates of pregestational (PGDM) and gestational diabetes (GDM), and their associated pregnancy complications, are rising. Pregnancies complicated by diabetes have increased cesarean delivery (CD) rates; however, there are limited data regarding the current rates of, and contributing factors to, these deliveries. The Robson Ten Group Classification System (TGCS) is a clinically relevant, standardized framework that can be used to evaluate and analyze cesarean rates. The objective of this study was to evaluate rates of, and indications for, intrapartum, unplanned CD among pregnancies complicated by diabetes, compared to normoglycemic (NG) pregnancies, in a large United States birth cohort. This retrospective cohort study used chart-abstracted data on births between 24 and 42 weeks' gestation at 17 hospitals that contributed to the Obstetrical Care Outcome Assessment Program database between 01/2016 and 03/2019. The CD rate for NG pregnancies, and pregnancies complicated by gestational and PGDM was calculated and compared using the Robson TGCS. The indications for intrapartum CD in patients with term, singleton, vertex gestations without a prior cesarean were then analyzed. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to compare the cesarean rate and indications for CD, between the diabetic groups and the NG group. Results were adjusted for maternal age, BMI, neonatal birth weight, and insurance status, as well as clustering by hospital. A total of 86,381 pregnant people were included in the study cohort. Of these 76,272 (88.3%) were NG, 8591 (9.9%) had GDM, and 1518 (1.8%) had PGDM. Compared to NG patients, overall cesarean rates were higher in patients with GDM (40.3% vs. 29.7%; aOR 1.25, 95%CI 1.18–1.31) and PGDM (60.0% vs. 29.7%; aOR 2.53, 95%CI 2.04–3.13). This finding remained true when the cohort was restricted to term, singleton, vertex laboring patients without a prior cesarean; compared to NG patients, the cesarean rate was higher in patients with GDM (17.4% vs. 12.2%, aOR 1.37, 95%CI 1.29–1.45) and PGDM (26.0% vs. 12.2%, aOR 2.55, 95%CI 2.00–3.25). The cesarean rate for fetal indications was similar in the GDM (5.7%) and NG (4.4%) groups, while those patients with PGDM had a significantly higher rate (10.4%; aOR 2.01, 95%CI 1.43–2.83). Similarly, the rate of cesarean for labor dystocia in patients with PGDM was significantly higher than in NG patients (16.9% vs. 7.0%, and aOR 2.28, 95%CI 1.66–3.13) while patients with GDM had an intermediate rate (10.6% vs. 7.0%, aOR 1.49, 95%CI 1.40–1.57). The CD rate is significantly higher in pregnancies complicated by diabetes, particularly pregestational, compared to NG pregnancies. Despite controlling for maternal factors and birth weight, pregnancies complicated by diabetes are more likely to undergo an unplanned intrapartum cesarean secondary to labor dystocia than their NG counterparts, but only pregnancies complicated by PGDM have an increased risk of cesarean for fetal indications. More research is needed to understand whether this higher cesarean rate is due to factors intrinsic to diabetes in laboring patients or is due to a difference in the way clinicians manage diabetics in labor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To examine associations between cervical dilation on admission and maternal and newborn outcomes in term spontaneous labor.Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of 11,368 singleton, term (37-43 6/7 weeks of gestation) spontaneously laboring women delivering in 14 hospitals in Washington State between 2012 and 2014 using chart abstracted data from the Obstetrics Clinical Outcomes Assessment Program. Women with prior cesarean delivery or ruptured membranes on admission were excluded. Pregnancy history, cervical dilation on admission, and outcomes were analyzed. Associations between early (less than 4 cm cervical dilation) and late (4 cm or greater cervical dilation) admission and outcomes were examined using general linear models with a log-link stratifying by parity. Results were reported as adjusted relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).Results: Early admission compared with late admission was associated with increased epidural use of 84.8% compared with 71.8% in nulliparous women and 66.3% compared with 53.1% in multiparous women (nulliparous RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.13-1.24; multiparous RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.18-1.32); oxytocin augmentation in 58.5% compared with 36.6% in nulliparous women and 45.9% compared with 20.7% in multiparous women (nulliparous RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.50-1.63; multiparous RR 2.14, 95% CI 1.87-2.44); and cesarean delivery of 21.8% compared with 14.5% in nulliparous women and 3.7% compared with 1.9% in multiparous women (nulliparous RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.32-1.70; multiparous women RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.47-2.57). Early admission was associated with increased neonatal intensive care unit admission for newborns of nulliparous women only (RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.01-1.89). Between 2012 and 2014, late admission increased 14.6% for nulliparous patients and 10.1% for multiparous patients, and the cesarean delivery rate decreased from 10.5% to 7.9% (P<.001) for all.Conclusion: Early admission (less than 4 cm cervical dilation) is a risk factor for increased medical intervention and cesarean delivery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of publication of the ARRIVE (A Randomized Trial of Induction Versus Expectant Management) trial on perinatal outcomes in singleton, term, nulliparous patients. METHODS: An interrupted time series analysis was performed using clinical data for nulliparous singleton births at 39 weeks of gestation or later at 13 hospitals in the Northwest region of the United States (January 2016– December 2020). A modified Poisson regression was used to model time trends and changes after the ARRIVE trial (August 9, 2018). Outcomes of interest were elective induction, unplanned cesarean births, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, a composite of perinatal adverse outcomes, and neonatal intensive care unit admissions. RESULTS: The analysis included 28,256 births (15,208 pre-ARRIVE and 13,048 post-ARRIVE). The rate of elective labor induction was 3.6% during the pre-ARRIVE period (January 2016–July 2018) and 10.8% post-ARRIVE (August 2018–December 2020). In the interrupted time series analysis, elective induction increased by 42% (relative risk [RR] 1.42; 95% CI 1.18–1.71) immediately after the ARRIVE trial publication. Thereafter, the trend was unchanged compared with the pre-ARRIVE period. There was no statistically significant change in cesarean birth (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.89–1.04) or hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.79–1.06) immediately after the trial, and no change in trend. After the ARRIVE trial, there was no immediate change in adverse perinatal outcomes, but a statistically significant increase in trend of adverse perinatal events (1.03; 95% CI 1.01– 1.05) when compared with a declining trend observed in the pre-ARRIVE period. CONCLUSION: Publication of the ARRIVE trial was associated with an increase in elective induction, and no change in cesarean birth or hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in singleton nulliparous patients giving birth at 39 weeks or later. There was a flattening of the pre-ARRIVE decreasing trend in perinatal adverse events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reports a case of sex-discordant monochorionic twins conceived by in vitro fertilization. Case Report; Methods; Results; Discussion.

Background: There is a renewed call to address preventable foetal deaths in high-income countries, especially where progress has been slow. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released publicly, for the first time, the initiating cause and estimated timing of foetal deaths in 2014. The objective of this study is to describe risk and characteristics of antepartum versus intrapartum stillbirths in the U.S., and frequency of pathological examination to determine cause.Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of singleton births (24-43 weeks) using 2014 U.S. Fetal Death and Natality data available from the National Center for Health Statistics. The primary outcome was timing of death (antepartum (n = 6200), intrapartum (n = 453), and unknown (n = 5403)). Risk factors of interest included maternal sociodemographic, behavioural, medical and obstetric factors, along with foetal sex. We estimated gestational week-specific stillbirth hazard, risk factors for intrapartum versus antepartum stillbirth using multivariable log-binomial regression models, conditional probabilities of intrapartum and antepartum stillbirth at each gestational week, and frequency of pathological examination by timing of death.Results: The gestational age-specific stillbirth hazard was approximately 2 per 10,000 foetus-weeks among preterm gestations and > 3 per 10,000 foetus-weeks among term gestations. Both antepartum and intrapartum stillbirth risk increased in late-term and post-term gestations. The risk of intrapartum versus antepartum stillbirth was higher among those without a prior live birth, relative to those with at least one prior live birth (RR 1.32; 95% CI 1.08-1.61) and those with gestational hypertension, relative to those with no report of gestational hypertension (RR 1.47; 95% CI 1.09-1.96), and lower among Black, relative to white, individuals (RR 0.70; 95% CI 0.55-0.89). Pathological examination was not performed/planned in 25% of known antepartum stillbirths and 29% of known intrapartum stillbirths.Conclusion: These findings suggest greater stillbirth risk in the late-term and post-term periods. Primiparous mothers had greater risk of intrapartum than antepartum still birth, suggesting the need for intrapartum interventions for primiparous mothers in this phase of pregnancy to prevent some intrapartum foetal deaths. Efforts are needed to improve understanding, prevention and investigation of foetal deaths as well as improve stillbirth data quality and completeness in the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]