Search

We sought to characterize demographics, costs, and workplace support for surgeons using assisted reproductive technology (ART), adoption, and surrogacy to build their families.As the surgical workforce diversifies, the needs of surgeons building a family are changing. ART, adoption, and surrogacy may be used with greater frequency among female surgeons who delay childbearing and surgeons in same-sex relationships. Little is known about costs and workplace support for these endeavors.An electronic survey was distributed to surgeons through surgical societies and social media. Rates of ART use were compared between partners of male surgeons and female surgeons and multivariate analysis used to assess risk factors. Surgeons using ART, adoption, or surrogacy were asked to describe costs and time off work to pursue these options.Eight hundred and fifty-nine surgeons participated. Compared to male surgeons, female surgeons were more likely to report delaying children due to surgical training (64.9% vs. 43.5%, P0.001), have fewer children (1.9 vs. 2.4, p0.001), and use ART (25.2% vs. 17.4%, P = 0.035). Compared to non-surgeon partners of male surgeons, female surgeons were older at first pregnancy (33 vs 31 years, P0.001) with age 35 years associated with greater odds of ART use (odds ratio 3.90; 95% confidence interval 2.74-5.55, P0.001). One-third of surgeons using ART spent$40,000; most took minimal time off work for treatments. Forty-five percent of same-sex couples used adoption or surrogacy. 60% of surgeons using adoption or surrogacy spent$40,000 and most took minimal paid parental leave.ART, adoption, or surrogacy is costly and lacks strong workplace support in surgery, disproportionately impacting women and same-sex couples. Equitable and inclusive environments supporting all routes to parenthood ensure recruitment and retention of a diverse workforce. Surgical leaders must enact policies and practices to normalize childbearing as part of an early surgical career, including financial support and equitable parental leave for a growing group of surgeons pursuing ART, surrogacy, or adoption to become parents.

ImportanceRisk-stratification tools are routinely used in obstetrics to assist care teams in assessing and communicating risk associated with delivery. Electronic health record data and machine learning methods may offer a novel opportunity to improve and automate risk assessment.ObjectiveTo compare the predictive performance of natural language processing (NLP) of clinician documentation with that of a previously validated tool to identify individuals at high risk for maternal morbidity.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis retrospective diagnostic study was conducted at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, and included individuals admitted for delivery at the former institution from July 1, 2016, to February 29, 2020. A subset of these encounters (admissions from February to December 2018) was part of a previous prospective validation study of the Obstetric Comorbidity Index (OB-CMI), a comorbidity-weighted score to stratify risk of severe maternal morbidity (SMM).ExposuresNatural language processing of clinician documentation and OB-CMI scores.Main Outcomes and MeasuresNatural language processing of clinician-authored admission notes was used to predict SMM in individuals delivering at the same institution but not included in the prospective OB-CMI study. The NLP model was then compared with the OB-CMI in the subset with a known OB-CMI score. Model discrimination between the 2 approaches was compared using the DeLong test. Sensitivity and positive predictive value for the identification of individuals at highest risk were prioritized as the characteristics of interest.ResultsThis study included 19 794 individuals; 4034 (20.4%) were included in the original prospective validation study of the OB-CMI (testing set), and the remaining 15 760 (79.6%) composed the training set. Mean (SD) age was 32.3 (5.2) years in the testing cohort and 32.2 (5.2) years in the training cohort. A total of 115 individuals in the testing cohort (2.9%) and 468 in the training cohort (3.0%) experienced SMM. The NLP model was built from a pruned vocabulary of 2783 unique words that occurred within the 15 760 admission notes from individuals in the training set. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the NLP-based model for the prediction of SMM was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.72-0.81) and was comparable with that of the OB-CMI model (0.74; 95% CI, 0.70-0.79) in the testing set (P = .53). Sensitivity (NLP, 28.7%; OB-CMI, 24.4%) and positive predictive value (NLP, 19.4%; OB-CMI, 17.6%) were comparable between the NLP and OB-CMI high-risk designations for the prediction of SMM.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this study, the NLP method and a validated risk-stratification tool had a similar ability to identify patients at high risk of SMM. Future prospective research is needed to validate the NLP approach in clinical practice and determine whether it could augment or replace tools requiring manual user input.

To explore provider perspectives surrounding national guidelines proposing regionalization of maternal care. An 18-item survey focused on provider attitudes and practices surrounding regionalized maternity care was administered to a national sample of practicing obstetricians. We classified respondants reporting less than 500 annual deliveries at their hospital as low-volume providers and those practicing at hospitals performing 500 or more annual deliveries as high-volume providers. We compared responses according to hospital delivery volume using univariate analysis. Of the 497 physicians surveyed, 278 people responded (56%) with 229 currently practicing obstetrics. The median annual delivery volume amongst respondents was 200 (interquartile range 100–1900) with 146 (63.7%) practicing in low-volume delivery centers. The need for medical or surgical expertise was the most commonly reported indication for maternal transfer (19.7%) and independent of practice setting. Ninety-six percent of providers agreed with the concept of regionalization, but respondents in high-volume centers reported higher familiarity with the levels of maternal care paradigm compared to their low-volume counterparts (81.9% v. 62.3%, p

We sought to assess whether lack of workplace support for clinical work reductions during pregnancy was associated with major pregnancy complications.Surgeons are at high risk of major pregnancy complications. Although rigorous operative schedules pose increased risk, few reduce their clinical duties during pregnancy.An electronic survey was distributed to US surgeons who had at least 1 live birth. Lack of workplace support was defined as: (1) desiring but feeling unable to reduce clinical duties during pregnancy due to failure of the workplace/training program to accommodate and/or concerns about financial penalties, burden on colleagues, requirement to make up missed call, being perceived as weak; (2) disagreeing colleagues and/or leadership were supportive of obstetrician-prescribed bedrest. Multivariate logistic regression determined the association between lack of workplace support and major pregnancy complications.Of 671 surgeons, 437 (65.13%) reported lack of workplace support during pregnancy and 302 (45.01%) experienced major pregnancy complications. Surgeons without workplace support were at higher risk of major pregnancy complications than those who had workplace support (odds ratio: 2.44; 95% confidence interval: 1.58-3.75). Bedrest was prescribed to 110/671 (16.39%) surgeons, 38 (34.55%) of whom disagreed that colleagues and/or leadership were supportive. Of the remaining surgeons, 417/560 (74.5%) desired work reductions but were deterred by lack of workplace support.Lack of workplace support for reduction in clinical duties is associated with adverse obstetric outcomes for surgeons. This is a modifiable workplace obstacle that deters surgeons from acting to optimize their infant's and their own health. To ensure the health of expectant surgeons, departmental policies should support reduction of clinical workload in an equitable manner without creating financial penalties, requiring payback for missed call duties, or overburdening colleagues.

Daily low-dose aspirin (LDA) is recommended in high-risk pregnancies. However, its safety profile in the first trimester has not been well documented.To determine if LDA exposure during the first trimester of pregnancy is associated with higher odds of congenital structural anomalies.PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched.Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assigned participants to LDA (≤150 mg) or placebo/no intervention at less than 14 weeks of pregnancy were eligible.Random-effects models were performed using the inverse-variance method to calculate pooled effect sizes. Quality of evidence was appraised according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) criteria.Eight RCTs that included 7564 participants assigned to receive daily LDA and 7670 participants that served as controls were analyzed. Low-certainty evidence showed no significant difference in the odds of congenital anomalies (odds ratio 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.62-1.23, IIn this meta-analysis, there is no evidence to suggest safety concerns regarding LDA teratogenicity. However, given the overall low quality of evidence, further research (e.g. individual participant data meta-analysis) is needed to confirm LDA safety profile.

Postpartum depression has well-established long-term adverse effects on maternal and infant health. Surgeons with rigorous operative schedules are at higher risk of obstetric complications, but they rarely reduce their workload during pregnancy. We evaluated whether lack of workplace support for work reductions during difficult pregnancies or after neonatal complications is associated with surgeon postpartum depression.An electronic survey was sent to practicing and resident surgeons of both sexes in the US. Female surgeons who had at least one live birth were included. Lack of workplace support was defined as: (1) disagreeing that colleagues/leadership were supportive of obstetric-mandated bedrest or time off to care for an infant in the neonatal intensive care unit; (2) feeling unable to reduce clinical duties during pregnancy despite health concerns or to care for an infant in the neonatal intensive care unit. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine the association of lack of workplace support with postpartum depression.Six hundred ninety-two surgeons were included. The 441 (63.7%) respondents who perceived a lack of workplace support had a higher risk of postpartum depression than those who did not perceive a lack of workplace support (odds ratio 2.21, 95% CI 1.09 to 4.46), controlling for age, race, career stage, and pregnancy/neonatal complications. Of the surgeons with obstetric-related work restrictions, 22.6% experienced loss of income and 38.5% reported$50,000 loss.Lack of workplace support for surgeons with obstetric or neonatal health concerns is associated with a higher risk of postpartum depression. Institutional policies must address the needs of surgeons facing difficult pregnancies to improve mental health outcomes and promote career longevity.

Increasing numbers of women with repaired tetralogy of Fallot (rTOF) are reaching reproductive age and seek counseling regarding their cardiovascular risks related to pregnancy. Therefore, the aim of this study was to characterize changes in left ventricular (LV) strain in women with rTOF during pregnancy and in the postpartum period. Seventeen pregnancies in women with rTOF were included (mean age at repair = 3.2 years ± 5.5 years; mean age at delivery = 32.7 ± 4 years). Echocardiograms from three time periods were analyzed; baseline (prior to conception or in the first trimester), third trimester, and 4–6 weeks postpartum. Sixty-five percent of the patients had at least mild pulmonary regurgitation. Eight patients (47%) had undergone at least one pulmonary valve replacement. There were no changes in LV ejection fraction (EF) or circumferential strain across the three time periods. Significant differences were present in longitudinal strain within the three time points (p = 0.01). Postpartum strain decreased in magnitude compared to the third trimester value (− 17.7 ± 4.1 vs. − 21 ± 5, p-value = 0.003) but was not different when compared to baseline strain (− 17.7 ± 4.1 vs. − 19.4 ± 3.4; p-value = 0.15). In conclusion, in women with rTOF, changes in longitudinal strain were observed during pregnancy with a return to baseline after delivery; EF did not change. These findings provide evidence that pregnancy does not adversely impact LV mechanics in the short term in this potentially vulnerable patient population.

Despite recent national improvements in family leave policies, there has been little focus on program-level support for surgical trainees. Trainees who may require clinical duty adjustments during pregnancy, who experience pregnancy loss, or who struggle with balancing work obligations with the demands of a new infant may face stigma when seeking schedule accommodations. The aim of this study was to describe program and colleague support of surgical trainees for pregnancy-related and postpartum health needs.Survey questionnaire. Participants responded to multiple-choice questions about their history of pregnancy loss, their experience with reduction of clinical duties during pregnancy, and their breastfeeding experience. Those who took time off after miscarriages or reduced their clinical duties during pregnancy were asked whether they perceived their colleagues and/or program leadership to be supportive using a 4-point Likert scale (1-strongly agree, 4-strongly disagree) which was dichotomized to agree/disagree.Electronically distributed through social media and surgical societies from November 2020 to January 2021.Female surgical residents and fellows.258 female surgical residents and fellows were included. Median age was 32 (IQR 30-35) years and 76.74% were white. Of the 52 respondents (20.2%) who reported a miscarriage, 38 (73.1%) took no time off after pregnancy loss, including 5 of 10 women (50%) whose loss occurred after 10 weeks' gestation. Of the 14 residents who took time off after a miscarriage, 4 (28.6%) disagreed their colleagues and/or leadership were supportive of time away from work. Among trainees who reported at least 1 live birth, only 18/114 (15.8%) reduced their work schedule during pregnancy. Of these, 11 (61.1%) described stigma and resentment from colleagues and 14 (77.8%) reported feeling guilty about burdening their colleagues. 100% of respondents reported a desire to breastfeed their infants, but nearly half (46.0%) were unable to reach their breastfeeding goals. 46 (80.7%) cited a lack of time to express breastmilk and 23 (40.4%) cited inadequate lactation facilities as barriers to achieving their breastfeeding goals.A minority of female trainees takes time off or reduces their clinical duties for pregnancy or postpartum health needs. National parental leave policies are insufficient without complementary program-level strategies that support schedule adjustments for pregnant trainees without engendering a sense of resentment or guilt for doing so. Surgical program leaders should initiate open dialogue, proactively offer clinical duty reductions, and ensure time and space for lactation needs to safeguard maternal-fetal health and improve the working environment for pregnant residents.

Background: The effect of COVID-19 in pregnancy on maternal outcomes and its association with preeclampsia and gestational diabetes mellitus have been reported; however, a detailed understanding of the effects of maternal positivity, delivery mode, and perinatal practices on fetal and neonatal outcomes is urgently needed. Objective: To evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on fetal and neonatal outcomes and the role of mode of delivery, breastfeeding, and early neonatal care practices on the risk of mother-to-child transmission. Study Design: In this cohort study that took place from March 2020 to March 2021, involving 43 institutions in 18 countries, 2 unmatched, consecutive, unexposed women were concomitantly enrolled immediately after each infected woman was identified, at any stage of pregnancy or delivery, and at the same level of care to minimize bias. Women and neonates were followed up until hospital discharge. COVID-19 in pregnancy was determined by laboratory confirmation and/or radiological pulmonary findings or ≥2 predefined COVID-19 symptoms. The outcome measures were indices of neonatal and perinatal morbidity and mortality, neonatal positivity and its correlation with mode of delivery, breastfeeding, and hospital neonatal care practices. Results: A total of 586 neonates born to women with COVID-19 diagnosis and 1535 neonates born to women without COVID-19 diagnosis were enrolled. Women with COVID-19 diagnosis had a higher rate of cesarean delivery (52.8% vs 38.5% for those without COVID-19 diagnosis, P14 days). Among neonates born to mothers with COVID-19 diagnosis, birth via cesarean delivery was a risk factor for testing positive for COVID-19 (odds ratio, 2.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.2–4.7), even when severity of maternal conditions was considered and after multivariable logistic analysis. In the subgroup of neonates born to women with COVID-19 diagnosis, the outcomes worsened when the neonate also tested positive, with higher rates of neonatal intensive care unit admission, fever, gastrointestinal and respiratory symptoms, and death, even after adjusting for prematurity. Breastfeeding by mothers with COVID-19 diagnosis and hospital neonatal care practices, including immediate skin-to-skin contact and rooming-in, were not associated with an increased risk of newborn positivity. Conclusion: In this multinational cohort study, COVID-19 in pregnancy was associated with increased maternal and neonatal complications. Cesarean delivery was significantly associated with newborn COVID-19 diagnosis. Vaginal delivery should be considered the safest mode of delivery if obstetrical and health conditions allow it. Mother-to-child skin-to-skin contact, rooming-in, and direct breastfeeding were not risk factors for newborn COVID-19 diagnosis, thus well-established best practices can be continued among women with COVID-19 diagnosis.

Background Among nonpregnant individuals, diabetes mellitus and high body mass index increase the risk of COVID-19 and its severity. Objective This study aimed to determine whether diabetes mellitus and high body mass index are risk factors for COVID-19 in pregnancy and whether gestational diabetes mellitus is associated with COVID-19 diagnosis. Study Design INTERCOVID was a multinational study conducted between March 2020 and February 2021 in 43 institutions from 18 countries, enrolling 2184 pregnant women aged ≥18 years; a total of 2071 women were included in the analyses. For each woman diagnosed with COVID-19, 2 nondiagnosed women delivering or initiating antenatal care at the same institution were also enrolled. The main exposures were preexisting diabetes mellitus, high body mass index (overweight or obesity was defined as a body mass index ≥25 kg/m2), and gestational diabetes mellitus in pregnancy. The main outcome was a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 based on a real-time polymerase chain reaction test, antigen test, antibody test, radiological pulmonary findings, or ≥2 predefined COVID-19 symptoms at any time during pregnancy or delivery. Relationships of exposures and COVID-19 diagnosis were assessed using generalized linear models with a Poisson distribution and log link function, with robust standard errors to account for model misspecification. Furthermore, we conducted sensitivity analyses: (1) restricted to those with a real-time polymerase chain reaction test or an antigen test in the last week of pregnancy, (2) restricted to those with a real-time polymerase chain reaction test or an antigen test during the entire pregnancy, (3) generating values for missing data using multiple imputation, and (4) analyses controlling for month of enrollment. In addition, among women who were diagnosed with COVID-19, we examined whether having gestational diabetes mellitus, diabetes mellitus, or high body mass index increased the risk of having symptomatic vs asymptomatic COVID-19. Results COVID-19 was associated with preexisting diabetes mellitus (risk ratio, 1.94; 95% confidence interval, 1.55–2.42), overweight or obesity (risk ratio, 1.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.06–1.37), and gestational diabetes mellitus (risk ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.99–1.46). The gestational diabetes mellitus association was specifically among women requiring insulin, whether they were of normal weight (risk ratio, 1.79; 95% confidence interval, 1.06–3.01) or overweight or obese (risk ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.28–2.45). A somewhat stronger association with COVID-19 diagnosis was observed among women with preexisting diabetes mellitus, whether they were of normal weight (risk ratio, 1.93; 95% confidence interval, 1.18–3.17) or overweight or obese (risk ratio, 2.32; 95% confidence interval, 1.82–2.97). When the sample was restricted to those with a real-time polymerase chain reaction test or an antigen test in the week before delivery or during the entire pregnancy, including missing variables using imputation or controlling for month of enrollment, the observed associations were comparable. Conclusion Diabetes mellitus and overweight or obesity were risk factors for COVID-19 diagnosis in pregnancy, and insulin-dependent gestational diabetes mellitus was associated with the disease. Therefore, it is essential that women with these comorbidities are vaccinated.

Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; 2019-nCoV; Hipertensió gestacional; Preeclampsia Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; 2019-nCoV; Hipertension gestacional; Preeclampsia Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; 2019-nCoV; Gestational hypertension; Preeclampsia Background It is unclear whether the suggested link between COVID-19 during pregnancy and preeclampsia is an independent association or if these are caused by common risk factors. Objective This study aimed to quantify any independent association between COVID-19 during pregnancy and preeclampsia and to determine the effect of these variables on maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality. Study Design This was a large, longitudinal, prospective, unmatched diagnosed and not-diagnosed observational study assessing the effect of COVID-19 during pregnancy on mothers and neonates. Two consecutive not-diagnosed women were concomitantly enrolled immediately after each diagnosed woman was identified, at any stage during pregnancy or delivery, and at the same level of care to minimize bias. Women and neonates were followed until hospital discharge using the standardized INTERGROWTH-21 st protocols and electronic data management system. A total of 43 institutions in 18 countries contributed to the study sample. The independent association between the 2 entities was quantified with the risk factors known to be associated with preeclampsia analyzed in each group. The outcomes were compared among women with COVID-19 alone, preeclampsia alone, both conditions, and those without either of the 2 conditions. Results We enrolled 2184 pregnant women; of these, 725 (33.2%) were enrolled in the COVID-19 diagnosed and 1459 (66.8%) in the COVID-19 not-diagnosed groups. Of these women, 123 had preeclampsia of which 59 of 725 (8.1%) were in the COVID-19 diagnosed group and 64 of 1459 (4.4%) were in the not-diagnosed group (risk ratio, 1.86; 95% confidence interval, 1.32–2.61). After adjustment for sociodemographic factors and conditions associated with both COVID-19 and preeclampsia, the risk ratio for preeclampsia remained significant among all women (risk ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.25–2.52) and nulliparous women specifically (risk ratio, 1.89; 95% confidence interval, 1.17–3.05). There was a trend but no statistical significance among parous women (risk ratio, 1.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.99–2.73). The risk ratio for preterm birth for all women diagnosed with COVID-19 and preeclampsia was 4.05 (95% confidence interval, 2.99–5.49) and 6.26 (95% confidence interval, 4.35–9.00) for nulliparous women. Compared with women with neither condition diagnosed, the composite adverse perinatal outcome showed a stepwise increase in the risk ratio for COVID-19 without preeclampsia, preeclampsia without COVID-19, and COVID-19 with preeclampsia (risk ratio, 2.16; 95% confidence interval, 1.63–2.86; risk ratio, 2.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.44–4.45; and risk ratio, 2.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.67–4.82, respectively). Similar findings were found for the composite adverse maternal outcome with risk ratios of 1.76 (95% confidence interval, 1.32–2.35), 2.07 (95% confidence interval, 1.20–3.57), and 2.77 (95% confidence interval, 1.66–4.63). The association between COVID-19 and gestational hypertension and the direction of the effects on preterm birth and adverse perinatal and maternal outcomes, were similar to preeclampsia, but confined to nulliparous women with lower risk ratios. Conclusion COVID-19 during pregnancy is strongly associated with preeclampsia, especially among nulliparous women. This association is independent of any risk factors and preexisting conditions. COVID-19 severity does not seem to be a factor in this association. Both conditions are associated independently of and in an additive fashion with preterm birth, severe perinatal morbidity and mortality, and adverse maternal outcomes. Women with preeclampsia should be considered a particularly vulnerable group with regard to the risks posed by COVID-19. The study was supported by the COVID-19 Research Response Fund from the University of Oxford (Ref 0009083). A.T.P. is supported by the Oxford Partnership Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre with funding from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre funding scheme. The funding organization had no involvement in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript, and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

IMPORTANCE: While surgeons often delay pregnancy and childbearing because of training and establishing early careers, little is known about risks of infertility and pregnancy complications among female surgeons. OBJECTIVE: To describe the incidence of infertility and pregnancy complications among female surgeons in the US and to identify workplace factors associated with increased risk compared with a sociodemographically similar nonsurgeon population. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This self-administered survey questionnaire was electronically distributed and collected from November 2020 to January 2021 through multiple surgical societies in the US and social media among male and female attending and resident surgeons with children. Nonchildbearing surgeons were asked to answer questions regarding the pregnancies of their nonsurgeon partners as applicable. EXPOSURES: Surgical profession; work, operative, and overnight call schedules. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Descriptive data on pregnancy loss were collected for female surgeons. Use of assisted reproductive technology was compared between male and female surgeons. Pregnancy and neonatal complications were compared between female surgeons and female nonsurgeon partners of surgeons. RESULTS: A total of 850 surgeons (692 women and 158 men) were included in this survey study. Female surgeons with female partners were excluded because of lack of clarity about who carried the pregnancy. Because the included nonchildbearing population was therefore made up of male individuals with female partners, this group is referred to throughout the study as male surgeons. The median (IQR) age was 40 (36-45) years. Of 692 female surgeons surveyed, 290 (42.0%) had a pregnancy loss, more than twice the rate of the general population. Compared with male surgeons, female surgeons had fewer children (mean [SD], 1.8 [0.8] vs 2.3 [1.1]; P

OBJECTIVE To examine the current patterns of care for women at high risk for delivery-related morbidity to inform discussions about the feasibility of this regionalized approach. METHODS We performed a cross-sectional study and linked 2014 American Hospital Association survey and State Inpatient Database data from seven representative states. We used American Hospital Association-reported hospital characteristics and State Inpatient Database procedure codes to assign a level of maternal care to each hospital. We then assigned each patient to a minimum required level of maternal care (I-IV) based on maternal comorbidities captured in the State Inpatient Database. Our outcome was delivery at a hospital with an inappropriately low level of maternal care. Comorbidities associated with delivery at an inappropriate hospital were assessed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS The analysis included 845,545 deliveries occurring at 556 hospitals. The majority of women had risk factors appropriate for delivery at level I or II hospitals (85.1% and 12.6%, respectively). A small fraction (2.4%) of women at high risk for maternal morbidity warranted delivery in level III or IV hospitals. The majority (97.6%) of women delivered at a hospital with an appropriate level of maternal care, with only 2.4% of women delivering at a hospital with an inappropriate level of maternal care. However, 43.4% of the 19,988 high-risk patients warranting delivery at level III or IV hospitals delivered at level I or II hospitals. Women with comorbidities likely to benefit from specialized care (eg, maternal cardiac disease, placenta previa with prior uterine surgery) had high rates of delivery at hospitals with an inappropriate level of maternal care (68.2% and 37.7%, respectively). CONCLUSION Though only 2.41% of deliveries occurred at hospitals with an inappropriate level of maternal care, a substantial fraction of women at risk for maternal morbidity delivered at hospitals potentially unequipped with resources to manage their needs. Promoting triage of high-risk patients to hospitals optimized to provide risk-appropriate care may improve maternal outcomes with minimal effect on most deliveries.

OBJECTIVES: The rate of severe maternal morbidity in the United States increased approximately 200% during 1993–2014. Few studies have reported on the health of the entire pregnant population, including women at low risk for maternal morbidity. This information might be useful for interventions aimed at primary prevention of pregnancy complications. To better understand this, we sought to describe the distribution of comorbid risk among all delivery hospitalizations in Massachusetts and its association with the distribution of severe maternal morbidity. METHODS: Using an existing algorithm, we assigned an obstetric comorbidity index (OCI) score to delivery hospitalizations contained in the Massachusetts pregnancy to early life longitudinal (PELL) data system during 1998–2013. We identified which hospitalizations included severe maternal morbidity and calculated the rate and frequency of these hospitalizations by OCI score. RESULTS: During 1998–2013, PELL contained 1,185,182 delivery hospitalizations; of these 5325 included severe maternal morbidity. Fifty-eight percent of delivery hospitalizations had an OCI score of zero. The mean OCI score increased from 0.60 in 1998 to 0.82 in 2013. Hospitalizations with an OCI score of zero comprised approximately one-third of all deliveries complicated by severe maternal morbidity, but had the lowest rate of severe maternal morbidity (22.8/10,000 delivery hospitalizations). CONCLUSIONS: The mean OCI score increased during the study period, suggesting that an overall increase in risk factors has occurred in the pregnant population in Massachusetts. Interventions that can make small decreases to the mean OCI score could have a substantial impact on the number of deliveries complicated by severe maternal morbidity. Additionally, all delivery facilities should be prepared for severe complications during low-risk deliveries.

Background We coordinated community health worker (CHW) promotions with training and support of government clinic nurses to increase uptake of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC), specifically the copper intrauterine device (IUD) and the hormonal implant, in Kigali, Rwanda. Methods From August 2015 to September 2016, CHW provided fertility goal-based family planning counseling focused on LARC methods, engaged couples in family planning counseling, and provided written referrals to clients expressing interest in LARC methods. Simultaneously, we provided didactic and practical training to clinic nurses on LARC insertion and removal. We evaluated: 1) aggregate pre- versus post-implementation LARC uptake as a function of CHW promotions, and 2) demographic factors associated with LARC uptake among women responding to CHW referrals. Results 7712 referrals were delivered by 184 CHW affiliated with eight government clinics resulting in 6072 family planning clinic visits (79% referral uptake). 95% of clinic visits resulted in LARC uptake (16% copper IUD, 79% hormonal implant). The monthly average for IUD insertions doubled from 29 prior to service implementation to 61 after (p

To examine the microbiology and associated antibiotic resistance patterns among febrile peripartum women with positive blood cultures.We conducted a retrospective cohort study in which we reviewed all bacteremia cases between 2009 and 2016 that occurred between 7 days before and 30 days after delivery. Institutional guidelines include obtaining blood cultures and promptly initiating intravenous antibiotics for all obstetric patients with fever of 100.4°F or higher. We describe antibiotic resistance patterns for the most frequently isolated organisms and perform univariate analyses regarding maternal and neonatal outcomes based on type of bacteremia.Among 56,835 deliveries, 3,797 (6.7%) obstetric patients had blood cultures drawn and 120 (3.2%) had documented bacteremia. The most commonly cultured organisms were Escherichia coli (17.5%, n=21), Bacteroides species (10.8%, n=13), Enterococcus species (10.8%, n=13), group B streptococci (10.8%, n=13), and group A streptococci (5.0%, n=6). E coli had high rates of resistance to ampicillin (n=17, 81.0%) and extended spectrum beta lactams (n=10, 47.6%). Gram-positive bacteremia was noted in 65/120 patients (54.2%), gram-negative bacteremia in 39/120 (32.5%), and anaerobic bacteremia in 16/120 (13.3%) (P=.02). Neonatal bacteremia was identified in 8/120 cases (6.7%), of which 7/8 (87.5%) were attributable to gram-negative bacteria and 1/8 (12.5%) were attributable to gram-positive bacteremia (P=.004). There were no differences in neonatal death or maternal intensive care unit admission.Peripartum bacteremia is uncommon, with the most frequently isolated organism being E coli. The evolution of antibiotic resistance patterns in E coli at our institution may be of clinical significance in determining antibiotic choice for peripartum fever.

To investigate the test characteristics of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) criteria for intrauterine inflammation or infection or both (triple I) and rates of adverse outcomes in a cohort of febrile intrapartum women.This retrospective cohort study included women at 24 weeks of gestation or greater from June 2015 to September 2017 at a single tertiary hospital with a temperature 100.4°F or greater (38.0°C) during labor or within 1 hour postpartum, all of whom had blood culture data. Women with a fetal demise, expectantly managed preterm prelabor rupture of membranes, or nonobstetric infections were excluded. Documented fever was defined as a single temperature 102.2°F or greater (39.0°C) or a temperature 100.4°F or greater (38.0°C) but less than 102.2°F (39.0°C) on two measurements 45 minutes apart. We defined two analysis groups: 1) suspected triple I, defined as women with documented fever with clinical signs of infection; and 2) isolated maternal fever, defined as women with at least one temperature 100.4°F or greater (38.0°C) who did not meet criteria for suspected triple I. We assessed test characteristics of suspected triple I to predict 1) confirmed triple I, defined as suspected triple I with placental pathology diagnostic of infection; and 2) adverse clinical infectious outcome, defined as a composite of maternal and neonatal adverse infectious outcomes. We also calculated the incidence of adverse clinical infectious outcomes for both groups.Three hundred thirty-nine women were analyzed: 212 with suspected triple I and 127 with isolated maternal fever. Baseline demographic and obstetric characteristics were similar between groups. The incidence of adverse clinical infectious outcomes was 11.8% among women with suspected triple I and 9.5% among women with isolated maternal fever (P=.50). The sensitivity and specificity of suspected triple I for confirmed triple I were 71.4% (95% CI 61.4-80.1%) and 40.5% (95% CI 33.6-47.8%), respectively, and for an adverse clinical infectious outcome were 67.6% (95% CI 50.2-82.0%) and 38.1% (95% CI 32.6-43.8%), respectively.Applying the NICHD criteria to guide clinical diagnosis and management of intrauterine infection or inflammation may overlook an important proportion of laboring febrile women at risk for adverse infectious outcomes.

Importance Detailed information about the association of COVID-19 with outcomes in pregnant individuals compared with not-infected pregnant individuals is much needed. Objective To evaluate the risks associated with COVID-19 in pregnancy on maternal and neonatal outcomes compared with not-infected, concomitant pregnant individuals. Design, Setting, and Participants In this cohort study that took place from March to October 2020, involving 43 institutions in 18 countries, 2 unmatched, consecutive, not-infected women were concomitantly enrolled immediately after each infected woman was identified, at any stage of pregnancy or delivery, and at the same level of care to minimize bias. Women and neonates were followed up until hospital discharge. Exposures COVID-19 in pregnancy determined by laboratory confirmation of COVID-19 and/or radiological pulmonary findings or 2 or more predefined COVID-19 symptoms. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome measures were indices of (maternal and severe neonatal/perinatal) morbidity and mortality; the individual components of these indices were secondary outcomes. Models for these outcomes were adjusted for country, month entering study, maternal age, and history of morbidity. Results A total of 706 pregnant women with COVID-19 diagnosis and 1424 pregnant women without COVID-19 diagnosis were enrolled, all with broadly similar demographic characteristics (mean [SD] age, 30.2 [6.1] years). Overweight early in pregnancy occurred in 323 women (48.6%) with COVID-19 diagnosis and 554 women (40.2%) without. Women with COVID-19 diagnosis were at higher risk for preeclampsia/eclampsia (relative risk [RR], 1.76; 95% CI, 1.27-2.43), severe infections (RR, 3.38; 95% CI, 1.63-7.01), intensive care unit admission (RR, 5.04; 95% CI, 3.13-8.10), maternal mortality (RR, 22.3; 95% CI, 2.88-172), preterm birth (RR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.30-1.94), medically indicated preterm birth (RR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.56-2.51), severe neonatal morbidity index (RR, 2.66; 95% CI, 1.69-4.18), and severe perinatal morbidity and mortality index (RR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.66-2.75). Fever and shortness of breath for any duration was associated with increased risk of severe maternal complications (RR, 2.56; 95% CI, 1.92-3.40) and neonatal complications (RR, 4.97; 95% CI, 2.11-11.69). Asymptomatic women with COVID-19 diagnosis remained at higher risk only for maternal morbidity (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.00-1.54) and preeclampsia (RR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.01-2.63). Among women who tested positive (98.1% by real-time polymerase chain reaction), 54 (13%) of their neonates tested positive. Cesarean delivery (RR, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.18-3.91) but not breastfeeding (RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.66-1.85) was associated with increased risk for neonatal test positivity. Conclusions and Relevance In this multinational cohort study, COVID-19 in pregnancy was associated with consistent and substantial increases in severe maternal morbidity and mortality and neonatal complications when pregnant women with and without COVID-19 diagnosis were compared. The findings should alert pregnant individuals and clinicians to implement strictly all the recommended COVID-19 preventive measures.

As intrapartum fevers are not always infectious in origin, determining whether antibiotics are indicated is challenging. We previously sought to create a point-of-care calculator using clinical data available at the time of an intrapartum fever to identify the subset of women who require antibiotic treatment to avoid maternal and neonatal morbidity. Despite the use of a comprehensive dataset from our institutions, we were unable to propose a valid and highly predictive model. In this commentary, we discuss why our model failed, as well as future research directions to identify and treat true intraamniotic infection. Developing a risk-stratification model is paramount to minimizing maternal and neonatal exposure to unnecessary antibiotics while allowing for early identification of women and babies at risk for infectious morbidity. KEY POINTS: · Determining whether antibiotics are indicated in intrapartum fever is challenging.. · Developing a risk-stratification model for febrile laboring women is critical to decreasing harm.. · A point-of-care calculator based on clinical and biomarker data is the necessary approach..

Objective Guidelines do not exist to determine timing of delivery for women with cardiovascular disease (CVD) in pregnancy. The neonatal benefit of a term delivery as compared with an early term delivery is well described. We sought to examine maternal outcomes in women with CVD who delivered in the early term period (370/7 through 386/7 weeks) compared with those who delivered later. Study Design This is a prospective cohort study examining cardiac and obstetric outcomes in women with CVD delivering between September 2011 and December 2016. The associations between gestational age at delivery and maternal, fetal, and obstetric characteristics were evaluated. Results Two-hundred twenty-five women with CVD were included, 83 (37%) delivered in the early term period and 142 (63%) delivered at term. While the early term group had significantly higher rates of any hypertension during pregnancy (18.1 vs. 7%, p = 0.01) and intrauterine growth restriction (22.9 vs. 2.8%, p Conclusion There is no maternal benefit of an early term delivery in otherwise healthy women with CVD. Given the known fetal consequences of early term delivery, this study offers support to existing literature suggesting term delivery in these women. Key Points

The acute rise in maternal morbidity and mortality in the United States is in part because of an increasingly medically complex obstetrical population. An estimated 1% to 3% of all obstetrical patients require intensive care, making timely delivery and availability of critical care imperative. The shifting landscape in obstetrical acuity places a burden on obstetrical providers, many of whom have limited experience in identifying and responding to critical illness. The levels of maternal care definitions by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine designate hospitals based on the availability of obstetrical resources and highlight the need for critical care resources and expertise. The growing need for critical care skills in the evolving contemporary obstetrical landscape serves as an opportunity to redefine the concept of delivery of care for high-risk obstetrical patients. We summarized the key tenets in the prevention of maternal morbidity and mortality, including the use of evidence-based tools for risk stratification and timely referral of patients to facilities with appropriate resources; innovative pathways for hospitals to provide critical care consultations on labor and delivery; and training of obstetrical providers in high-yield critical care skills, such as point-of-care ultrasonography. These critical care-focused interventions are key in addressing an increasingly complex obstetrical patient population while providing an educational foundation for the training of future obstetrical providers.

BackgroundWhen integrated with couples’ voluntary HIV counselling and testing (CVCT), family planning including long acting reversible contraceptives (LARC) addresses prongs one and two of prevention of mother-to-child transmission (PMTCT).MethodsIn this observational study, we enrolled equal numbers of HIV concordant and discordant couples in four rural and four urban clinics, with two Catholic and two non-Catholic clinics in each area. Eligible couples were fertile, not already using a LARC method, and wished to limit or delay fertility for at least 2 years. We provided CVCT and fertility goal-based family planning counselling with the offer of LARC and conducted multivariate analysis of clinic, couple, and individual predictors of LARC uptake.ResultsOf 1290 couples enrolled, 960 (74%) selected LARC: Jadelle 5-year implant (37%), Implanon 3-year implant (26%), or copper intrauterine device (IUD) (11%). Uptake was higher in non-Catholic clinics (85% vs. 63% in Catholic clinics,p p p = .0005). Religion of the couple was unrelated to clinic religious affiliation, and uptake was highest among Catholics (80%) and lowest among Protestants (70%) who were predominantly Pentecostal. In multivariable analysis, urban location and non-Catholic clinic affiliation, Catholic religion of woman or couple, younger age of men, lower educational level of both partners, non-use of condoms or injectable contraception at enrollment, prior discussion of LARC by the couple, and women not having concerns about negative side effects of implant were associated with LARC uptake.ConclusionsFertility goal-based LARC recommendations combined with couples’ HIV counselling and testing resulted in a high uptake of LARC methods, even among discordant couples using condoms for HIV prevention, in Catholic clinics, and in rural populations. This model successfully integrates prevention of HIV and unplanned pregnancy.

Objective: It is important to train clinicians to maintain and optimise maternal and neonatal outcomes after vaginal twin delivery. Simulation-based training provides opportunities for training in a realistic way without harming patients. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of simulation-based training concerning twin vaginal delivery on knowledge and comfort of obstetrician-gynaecologists. Study design: Obstetrician-gynaecologists participated in a twin vaginal delivery simulation between March 2018 and May 2019. Simulation-based training consisted of standardized patient interviews, didactic sessions and three different simulation-based scenarios: internal podalic version and breech extraction, assisted vaginal delivery and vaginal breech delivery with problems of aftercoming head. Pre- and posttraining, participants were asked to fill out questionnaires exploring knowledge concerning vertex-vertex twin deliveries and vertex-nonvertex twin deliveries, level of comfort performing various obstetric manoeuvres and counselling on mode of delivery for women pregnant with twins. Our primary outcome of interest was a change in knowledge or comfort surrounding vaginal twin delivery after completion of the simulation-based training. Results: The estimated median number of vaginal twin deliveries performed by the participating thirty-four obstetrician-gynaecologists was 50 (IQR 20–100). Significant improvements were seen in knowledge regarding twin deliveries with vertex-nonvertex presentation (p < 0.01). In two of three questions regarding twin delivery with vertex-vertex presentation significant improvements were seen as well (p < 0.01). Before training, 40.6% of participants felt comfortable to perform internal podalic version compared to 91.2% afterwards (p < 0.01). Comfort with breech extraction increased from 69.7% to 97.1% pre- and posttraining, respectively (p < 0.01). Before training only 55.9% would strongly counsel patients towards vaginal twin delivery as opposed to 73.5% after training (p = 0.07). Conclusions: Simulation-based training results in beneficial effects on knowledge and comfort concerning vaginal twin deliveries for obstetrician-gynaecologists. This training suggested a potential impact on provider practice with a more favourable attitude towards twin vaginal birth.

Pregnant patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, the virus responsible for the clinical condition newly described in 2019 as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and illness severity to warrant intensive care have a complex disease process that must involve multiple disciplines. Guidelines from various clinical societies, along with direction from local health authorities, must be considered when approaching the care of an obstetric patient with known or suspected COVID-19. With a rapidly changing landscape, a simplified and cohesive perspective using guidance from different clinical society recommendations regarding the critically-ill obstetric patient with COVID-19 is needed. In this article, we synthesize various high-level guidelines of clinical relevance in the management of pregnant patients with severe disease or critical illness due to COVID-19. KEY POINTS: · When caring for severely ill obstetric patients with COVID-19, one must be well versed in the complications that may need to be managed including, but not limited to adult respiratory distress syndrome with need for mechanical ventilation, approach to refractory hypoxemia, hemodynamic shock, and multiorgan system failure.. · Prone positioning can be done safely in gravid patients but requires key areas of support to avoid abdominal compression.. · For the critically ill obstetric patient with COVID-19, the focus should be on supportive care as a bridge to recovery rather than delivery as a solution to recovery..

Increasing numbers of women with repaired tetralogy of Fallot (rTOF) are reaching reproductive age and seek counseling regarding their cardiovascular risks related to pregnancy. Therefore, the aim of this study was to characterize changes in left ventricular (LV) strain in women with rTOF during pregnancy and in the postpartum period. Seventeen pregnancies in women with rTOF were included (mean age at repair = 3.2 years ± 5.5 years; mean age at delivery = 32.7 ± 4 years). Echocardiograms from three time periods were analyzed; baseline (prior to conception or in the first trimester), third trimester, and 4-6 weeks postpartum. Sixty-five percent of the patients had at least mild pulmonary regurgitation. Eight patients (47%) had undergone at least one pulmonary valve replacement. There were no changes in LV ejection fraction (EF) or circumferential strain across the three time periods. Significant differences were present in longitudinal strain within the three time points (p = 0.01). Postpartum strain decreased in magnitude compared to the third trimester value (- 17.7 ± 4.1 vs. - 21 ± 5, p-value = 0.003) but was not different when compared to baseline strain (- 17.7 ± 4.1 vs. - 19.4 ± 3.4; p-value = 0.15). In conclusion, in women with rTOF, changes in longitudinal strain were observed during pregnancy with a return to baseline after delivery; EF did not change. These findings provide evidence that pregnancy does not adversely impact LV mechanics in the short term in this potentially vulnerable patient population.

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of maternal death and cases of cardiovascular death are often associated with failure to provide timely risk-appropriate care. This review outlines considerations for creation of a team focused on the care of women with CVD during pregnancy and beyond. Improved outcomes for women with complex medical or obstetric conditions managed by a multidisciplinary care team inspired national guidelines advising the creation of a Pregnancy Heart Team for women with CVD in pregnancy. The recommendations from the European Society of Cardiology provide general guidance for risk-appropriate care without elaborating on the details of these specialized care teams. A Pregnancy Heart Team led by providers from cardiology, maternal-fetal medicine, obstetrics, obstetric anesthesia, pharmacy, and nursing support a holistic approach to patient care while facilitating opportunities for cross-disciplinary education. This team should focus on frequent antepartum risk stratification, multidisciplinary delivery planning, and comprehensive preconception and postpartum care. Available evidence suggests that a consistent and integrated approach to care for women with CVD in pregnancy has the potential to decrease severe maternal morbidity and mortality. The cost-effectiveness of this approach and the impact of this comprehensive care model on a woman’s long-term cardiovascular health warrant future study.

In the United States (USA), maternal mortality has increased in the last 25 years. Much of this increase is likely attributable to a higher burden of maternal medical illness [1–6]. Maternal morbidity and “near miss” events have also markedly increased during the same interval, by as much as 75% by some estimates [6]. Maternal critical illness, defined by end organ dysfunction, need for advanced treatment (need for ventilation, vasopressor requirement) or diagnostic criteria (see Chap. 1), is now relatively common in the obstetric population [7]. Admission of a pregnant or postpartum patient to the ICU is estimated to occur in 1 in every 300 deliveries [8], accounting for 12.1% of all ICU admissions for women aged 16–50 [9]. Obstetric patients requiring ICU-level care are also being treated outside of the formal critical care setting, with studies showing that 1–3% of parturients require ICU-level care or are at risk of developing maternal critical illness [10, 11]. Identifying obstetric patients at risk of clinical deterioration and critical illness, therefore, represents an important component of a comprehensive strategy to address the needs of increasingly ill pregnant and postpartum women. Early identification of those at risk may accelerate transfer to high-risk centers and/or allows timely intervention, thereby reversing these trends in morbidity and mortality.

Objective The objective of this study was to investigate the relationship between preterm birth in a prior pregnancy and preterm birth in a twin pregnancy. Study Design We performed a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial evaluating 17-α-hydroxyprogesterone caproate in twins. Women were classified as nulliparous, multiparous with a prior term birth, or multiparous with a prior preterm birth. We used logistic regression to examine the odds of spontaneous preterm birth of twins before 35 weeks according to past obstetric history. Results Of the 653 women analyzed, 294 were nulliparas, 310 had a prior term birth, and 49 had a prior preterm birth. Prior preterm birth increased the likelihood of spontaneous delivery before 35 weeks (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.44, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.28–4.66), whereas prior term delivery decreased these odds (aOR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.38–0.78) in the current twin pregnancy compared with the nulliparous reference group. This translated into a lower odds of composite neonatal morbidity (aOR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.27–0.53) for women with a prior term delivery. Conclusion For women carrying twins, a history of preterm birth increases the odds of spontaneous preterm birth, whereas a prior term birth decreases odds of spontaneous preterm birth and neonatal morbidity for the current twin pregnancy. These results offer risk stratification and reassurance for clinicians.