Early suppression policies protected pregnant women from COVID-19 in 2020: A population-based surveillance from the Nordic countries.

INTRODUCTION: The Coronavirus 2019 Disease (COVID-19) pandemic reached the Nordic countries in March 2020. Public health interventions to limit viral transmission varied across different countries both in timing and in magnitude. Interventions indicated by an Oxford Stringency Index ≥50 were implemented early (March 13-17, 2020) in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Iceland, and on March 26, 2020 in Sweden. The aim of the current study was to assess the incidence of COVID-19-related admissions of pregnant women in the Nordic countries in relation to the different national public health strategies during the first year of the pandemic. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a meta-analysis of population-based cohort studies in the five Nordic countries with national or regional surveillance in the Nordic Obstetric Surveillance System (NOSS) collaboration: national data from Denmark, Finland, Iceland and Norway, and regional data covering 31% of births in Sweden. The source population consisted of women giving birth in the included areas March 1-December 31, 2020. Pregnant women with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test ≤14 days before hospital admission were included, and admissions were stratified as either COVID-19-related or non-COVID (other obstetric healthcare). Information about public health policies was retrieved retrospectively. RESULTS: In total, 392 382 maternities were considered. Of these, 600 women were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection and 137 (22.8%) were admitted for COVID-19 symptoms. The pooled incidence of COVID-19 admissions per 1000 maternities was 0.5 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.2 to 1.2, I2 = 77.6, tau2 = 0.68, P = 0.0), ranging from no admissions in Iceland to 1.9 admissions in the Swedish regions. Interventions to restrict viral transmission were less stringent in Sweden than in the other Nordic countries. CONCLUSIONS: There was a clear variation in pregnant women's risk of COVID-19 admission across countries with similar healthcare systems but different public health interventions to limit viral transmission. The meta-analysis indicates that early suppression policies protected pregnant women from severe COVID-19 disease prior to the availability of individual protection with vaccines.

Variations across Europe in hospitalization and management of pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 during the initial phase of the pandemic: Multi-national population-based cohort study using the International Network of Obstetric Survey Systems (INOSS).

INTRODUCTION: The majority of data on COVID-19 in pregnancy are not from sound population-based active surveillance systems. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a multi-national study of population-based national or regional prospective cohorts using standardized definitions within the International Network of Obstetric Survey systems (INOSS). From a source population of women giving birth between March 1 and August 31, 2020, we included pregnant women admitted to hospital with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test ≤7 days prior to or during admission and up to 2 days after birth. The admissions were further categorized as COVID-19-related or non-COVID-19-related. The primary outcome of interest was incidence of COVID-19-related hospital admission. Secondary outcomes included severe maternal disease (ICU admission and mechanical ventilation) and COVID-19-directed medical treatment. RESULTS: In a source population of 816 628 maternities, a total of 2338 pregnant women were admitted with SARS-CoV-2; among them 940 (40%) were COVID-19-related admissions. The pooled incidence estimate for COVID-19-related admission was 0.59 (95% confidence interval 0.27-1.02) per 1000 maternities, with notable heterogeneity across countries (I2 = 97.3%, P = 0.00). In the COVID-19 admission group, between 8% and 17% of the women were admitted to intensive care, and 5%-13% needed mechanical ventilation. Thromboprophylaxis was the most frequent treatment given during COVID-19-related admission (range 14%-55%). Among 908 infants born to women in the COVID-19-related admission group, 5 (0.6%) stillbirths were reported. CONCLUSIONS: During the initial months of the pandemic, we found substantial variations in incidence of COVID-19-related admissions in nine European countries. Few pregnant women received COVID-19-directed medical treatment. Several barriers to rapid surveillance were identified. Investment in robust surveillance should be prioritized to prepare for future pandemics.

SARS-CoV-2 placentitis and severe pregnancy outcome after maternal infection: A Danish case series.

INTRODUCTION: SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy may cause viral inflammation of the placenta, resulting in fetal demise even without fetal or newborn infection. The impact of timing of the infection and the mechanisms that cause fetal morbidity and mortality are not well understood. MATERIAL AND METHODS: To describe placental pathology from women with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy, a SARS-CoV-2 immunohistochemistry-positive placenta and late miscarriage, stillbirth, neonatal death, or medically indicated birth due to fetal distress. RESULTS: The triad of trophoblastic necrosis, inflammatory intervillous infiltrates, and increased perivillous fibrinoid deposition was present in all 17 placentas; the pregnancies resulted in eight stillbirths, two late miscarriages (19 and 21 weeks' gestation), and seven liveborn children, two of which died shortly after delivery. The severity of maternal COVID-19 was not reflected by the extent of the placental lesions. In only one case, SARS-CoV-2 was detected in lung tissue samples from the fetus. The majority events (miscarriage, stillbirth, fetal distress resulting in indicated birth, or livebirth, but neonatal death) happened shortly after maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection was diagnosed. Seven of eight sequenced cases were infected with the Delta (B.1.617.2) virus strain. CONCLUSION: We consolidate findings from previous case series describing extensive SARS-CoV-2 placentitis and placental insufficiency leading to fetal hypoxia. We found sparse evidence to support the notion that SARS-CoV-2 virus had infected the fetus or newborn.

Severe COVID-19 during pregnancy in Sweden, Norway, and Denmark.

INTRODUCTION: Pregnancy is a risk factor for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and adverse pregnancy outcomes. We aimed to explore maternal characteristics, pregnancy outcomes, vaccination status, and virus variants among pregnant women admitted to intensive care units (ICU) with severe COVID-19. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We identified pregnant women admitted to ICU in Sweden (n = 96), Norway (n = 31), and Denmark (n = 16) because of severe COVID-19, from national registers and clinical databases between March 2020 and February 2022 (Denmark), August 2022 (Sweden), or December 2022 (Norway). Their background characteristics, pregnancy outcome, and vaccination status were compared with all birthing women and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) test-positive pregnant women during the same time period. We calculated the number admitted to ICU per 10 000 birthing and per 1000 SARS-CoV-2 test-positive women during the Index, Alpha, Delta, and Omicron periods. RESULTS: Women admitted to ICU had a higher mean body mass index, were more often of non-Scandinavian origin, had on average lower education and income levels, had a higher proportion of chronic and pregnancy-related conditions, delivered preterm, had neonates with low Apgar scores, and had more infants admitted to neonatal care, compared with all birthing and test-positive pregnant women. Of those admitted to ICU, only 7% had been vaccinated before admission. Overall, the highest proportion of women admitted to ICU per birthing was during the Delta period (4.1 per 10 000 birthing women). In Norway, the highest proportion admitted to ICU per test-positive pregnant women was during the Delta period (17.8 per 1000 test-positive), whereas the highest proportion of admitted per test-positive in Sweden and Denmark was seen during the Index period (15.4 and 8.9 per 1000 test-positive, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Admission to ICU because of COVID-19 in pregnancy was a rare event in the Scandinavian countries, but women who were unvaccinated, of non-Scandinavian origin, and with lower socio-economic status were at higher risk of admission to ICU. In addition, women admitted to ICU for COVID-19 had higher risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes.

Risk factors for and pregnancy outcomes after SARS-CoV-2 in pregnancy according to disease severity: A nationwide cohort study with validation of the SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis.

INTRODUCTION: We identified risk factors and outcomes associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy in a universally tested population according to disease severity and validated information on SARS-CoV-2 during pregnancy in national health registers in Denmark. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Cohort study using data from national registers and medical records including all pregnancies between March 1, 2020 and February 28, 2021. We compared women with a validated positive SARS-CoV-2 test during pregnancy with non-infected pregnant women. Risk factors and pregnancy outcomes were assessed by Poisson and Cox regression models and stratified according to disease severity defined by hospital admission status and admission reason (COVID-19 symptoms or other). Using medical record data on actual period of pregnancy, we calculated predictive values of the SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis in pregnancy in the registers. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 infection was detected in 1819 (1.6%) of 111 185 pregnancies. Asthma was associated with infection (relative risk [RR] 1.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28-2.07). Risk factors for severe COVID-19 disease requiring hospital admission were high body mass index (median ratio 1.06, 95% CI 1.04-1.09), asthma (RR 7.47, 95% CI 3.51-15.90) and gestational age at the time of infection (gestational age 28-36 vs < 22: RR 3.53, 95% CI 1.75-7.10). SARS-CoV-2-infected women more frequently had hypertensive disorders in pregnancy (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.31, 95% CI 1.04-1.64), early pregnancy loss (aHR 1.37, 95% CI 1.00-1.88), preterm delivery before gestational age 28 (aHR 2.31, 95% CI 1.01-5.26), iatrogenically preterm delivery before gestational age 37 (aHR 1.49, 95% CI 1.01-2.19) and small-for-gestational age children (aHR 1.28, 95% CI 1.05-1.54). The associations were stronger among women admitted to hospital for any reason. The validity of the SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis in relation to pregnancy in the registers compared with medical records showed a negative predictive value of 99.9 (95% CI 99.9-100.0) and a positive predictive value of 82.1 (95% CI 80.4-83.7). CONCLUSIONS: Women infected with SARS-CoV-2 during pregnancy were at increased risk of hypertensive disorders in pregnancy, early pregnancy loss, preterm delivery and having children small for gestational age. The validity of Danish national registers was acceptable for identification of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy.

The perinatal health challenges of emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases: A narrative review.

The world has seen numerous infectious disease outbreaks in the past decade. In many cases these outbreaks have had considerable perinatal health consequences including increased risk of preterm delivery (e.g., influenza, measles, and COVID-19), and the delivery of low birth weight or small for gestational age babies (e.g., influenza, COVID-19). Furthermore, severe perinatal outcomes including perinatal and infant death are a known consequence of multiple infectious diseases (e.g., Ebola virus disease, Zika virus disease, pertussis, and measles). In addition to vaccination during pregnancy (where possible), pregnant women, are provided some level of protection from the adverse effects of infection through community-level application of evidence-based transmission-control methods. This review demonstrates that it takes almost 2 years for the perinatal impacts of an infectious disease outbreak to be reported. However, many infectious disease outbreaks between 2010 and 2020 have no associated pregnancy data reported in the scientific literature, or pregnancy data is reported in the form of case-studies only. This lack of systematic data collection and reporting has a negative impact on our understanding of these diseases and the implications they may have for pregnant women and their unborn infants. Monitoring perinatal health is an essential aspect of national and global healthcare strategies as perinatal life has a critical impact on early life mortality as well as possible effects on later life health. The unpredictable nature of emerging infections and the potential for adverse perinatal outcomes necessitate that we thoroughly assess pregnancy and perinatal health implications of disease outbreaks and their public health interventions in tandem with outbreak response efforts. Disease surveillance programs should incorporate perinatal health monitoring and health systems around the world should endeavor to continuously collect perinatal health data in order to quickly update pregnancy care protocols as needed.

A prospective cohort study of confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection during pregnancy evaluating SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in maternal and umbilical cord blood and SARS-CoV-2 in vaginal swabs.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence about the consequences of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in pregnancy is rapidly increasing; however, data on antibody response and risk of transmission during pregnancy and delivery are still limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate if SARS-CoV-2 is detectable in vaginal swabs and whether antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 are present in maternal and umbilical cord blood of pregnant women with confirmed SARS-CoV-2. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A single-unit prospective cohort study in Denmark including pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by a pharyngeal swab between August 20, 2020, and March 1, 2021, who gave birth during the same period. All patients admitted to the maternity ward and antepartum clinic were screened for SARS-CoV-2 infection. A maternal blood sample and vaginal swabs were collected at inclusion. If included antepartum, these samples were repeated intrapartum when an umbilical cord blood sample was also collected. Swabs were analyzed for SARS-CoV-2 and blood samples were analyzed for SARS-CoV-2 total antibodies. Placental and neonatal swabs as well as placental histopathological examinations were performed on clinical indications. RESULTS: We included 28 women, of whom four had serious maternal or fetal outcomes including one case of neonatal death. Within the first 8 days after confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, SARS-CoV-2 was detectable in two vaginal swabs (2/28) and SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were detected in 1 of 13 women. From 16 days after confirmed infection, antibodies were observed in 19 of 21 of women. Antibodies in cord blood were not detected during the first 16 days after confirmed infection (n = 7). However, from 26 days, antibodies were present in 16 of 17 cord blood samples of seropositive mothers. Placental examination in two cases of severe fetal outcomes preceded by reduced fetal movements revealed SARS-CoV-2 in swabs and severe histopathological abnormalities. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 was detected in only 2 of 28 vaginal swabs within 8 days after confirmed infection in pregnant women. Our data suggest that maternal seroconversion occurs between days 8 and 16, whereas antibodies in cord blood of seropositive mothers were present in the majority from 26 days after confirmed infection. Additional data are needed regarding timing of seroconversion for the mother and appearance of antibodies in cord blood.

SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy in Denmark-characteristics and outcomes after confirmed infection in pregnancy: A nationwide, prospective, population-based cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Assessing the risk factors for and consequences of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during pregnancy is essential to guide clinical care. Previous studies on SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy have been among hospitalized patients, which may have exaggerated risk estimates of severe outcomes because all cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the pregnant population were not included. The objectives of this study were to identify risk factors for and outcomes after SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy independent of severity of infection in a universally tested population, and to identify risk factors for and outcomes after severe infection requiring hospital admission. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a prospective population-based cohort study in Denmark using data from the Danish National Patient Register and Danish Microbiology Database and prospectively registered data from medical records. We included all pregnancies between March 1 and October 31, 2020 and compared women with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test during pregnancy to non-infected pregnant women. Cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy were both identified prospectively and through register linkage to ensure that all cases were identified and that cases were pregnant during infection. Main outcome measures were pregnancy, delivery, maternal, and neonatal outcomes. Severe infection was defined as hospital admission due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms. RESULTS: Among 82 682 pregnancies, 418 women had SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy, corresponding to an incidence of 5.1 per 1000 pregnancies, 23 (5.5%) of which required hospital admission due to COVID-19. Risk factors for infection were asthma (odds ratio [OR] 2.19, 95% CI 1.41-3.41) and being foreign born (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.70-2.64). Risk factors for hospital admission due to COVID-19 included obesity (OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.00-7.51), smoking (OR 4.69, 95% CI 1.58-13.90), infection after gestational age (GA) 22 weeks (GA 22-27 weeks: OR 3.77, 95% CI 1.16-12.29; GA 28-36 weeks: OR 4.76, 95% CI 1.60-14.12), and having asthma (OR 4.53, 95% CI 1.39-14.79). We found no difference in any obstetrical or neonatal outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Only 1 in 20 women with SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy required admission to hospital due to COVID-19. Risk factors for admission comprised obesity, smoking, asthma, and infection after GA 22 weeks. Severe adverse outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy were rare.

COVID-19 in pregnancy-characteristics and outcomes of pregnant women admitted to hospital because of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the Nordic countries.

INTRODUCTION: Population-based studies about the consequences of SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19) in pregnancy are few and have limited generalizability to the Nordic population and healthcare systems. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study examines pregnant women with COVID-19 in the five Nordic countries. Pregnant women were included if they were admitted to hospital between 1 March and 30 June 2020 and had a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test ≤14 days prior to admission. Cause of admission was classified as obstetric or COVID-19-related. RESULTS: In the study areas, 214 pregnant women with a positive test were admitted to hospital, of which 56 women required hospital care due to COVID-19. The risk of admission due to COVID-19 was 0.4/1000 deliveries in Denmark, Finland and Norway, and 3.8/1000 deliveries in the Swedish regions. Women hospitalized because of COVID-19 were more frequently obese (p < 0.001) and had a migrant background (p < 0.001) compared with the total population of women who delivered in 2018. Twelve women (21.4%) needed intensive care. Among the 56 women admitted due to COVID-19, 48 women delivered 51 infants. Preterm delivery (n = 12, 25%, p < 0.001) and cesarean delivery (n = 21, 43.8%, p < 0.001) were more frequent in women with COVID-19 compared with women who delivered in 2018. No maternal deaths, stillbirths or neonatal deaths were reported. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of admission due to COVID-19 disease in pregnancy was low in the Nordic countries. A fifth of the women required intensive care and we observed higher rates of preterm and cesarean deliveries. National public health policies appear to have had an impact on the risk of admission due to severe COVID-19 disease in pregnancy. Nordic collaboration is important in collecting robust data and assessing rare outcomes.

From prescription to guidance: a European framework for generic competencies.

In postgraduate medical education, required competencies are described in detail in existing competency frameworks. This study proposes an alternative strategy for competency-based medical education design, which is supported by change management theories. We demonstrate the value of allowing room for re-invention and creative adaptation of innovations. This new strategy was explored for the development of a new generic competency framework for a harmonised European curriculum in Obstetrics and Gynaecology. The generic competency framework was developed through action research. Data were collected by four European stakeholder groups (patients, nurses, midwives and hospital boards), using a variety of methods. Subsequently, the data were analysed further in consensus discussions with European specialists and trainees in Obstetrics and Gynaecology. These discussions ensured that the framework provides guidance, is specialty-specific, and that implementation in all European countries could be feasible. The presented generic competency framework identifies four domains: 'Patient-centred care', 'Teamwork', 'System-based practice' and 'Personal and professional development'. For each of these four domains, guiding competencies were defined. The new generic competency framework is supported by European specialists and trainees in Obstetrics and Gynaecology, as well as by their European stakeholders. According to change management theories, it seems vital to allow room for re-invention and creative adaptation of the competency framework by medical professionals. Therefore, the generic competency framework offers guidance rather than prescription. The presented strategy for competency framework development offers leads for implementation of competency-based medical education as well as for development of innovations in postgraduate medical education in general.

[Socioeconomic inequality affects pregnancy and birth outcomes in Denmark].

The Danish healthcare system offers free and equal access to healthcare, including free preventive maternity care and birth assistance. Nevertheless, in Denmark, women of low socioeconomic status, especially women with a low level of education, have an increased risk of obstetric complications including low birth weight, preterm birth, stillbirth and congenital malformations. Smoking is a significant mediator but cannot alone explain the associations. Inadequate health literacy is probably an influencing factor. Individualised care is offered in Denmark, but the effect has not yet been analysed.

Lessons learnt from anonymized review of cases of peripartum hysterectomy by international experts: A qualitative pilot study.

Severe obstetric complications are not extensively studied and individual cases are used too little and inappropriately in quality improvement activities, due to limited numbers and prioritization of quantitative research. Nordic and European experts performed a qualitative pilot study using anonymized cases of peripartum hysterectomy. It was feasible to anonymize narratives and we learned lessons in the form of themes for improved clinical care and future research. Therefore, we plan a Nordic anonymized review of the care of women who have undergone peripartum hysterectomy based on narratives. The qualitative outcomes of clinically relevant themes for quality improvement and research will add value to the quantitative analyses from the Nordic medical birth registries. In the longer term, we believe that qualitative audits should be an essential part of the process of continuing improvement in maternity care.

Sexual Health During Postgraduate Training-European Survey Across Medical Specialties.

BACKGROUND: Sexual health problems are common. Therefore, training in sexual health is relevant for the clinical practice of trainees and early-career specialists in several specialties who deal with patients with sexual health problems. However, little is known about how sexual health training is provided across countries and specialties. AIM: To assess (i) sexual health training during postgraduate training programs in psychiatry, obstetrics and gynecology, urology, and endocrinology across Europe; (ii) the confidence of trainees and early-career specialists in dealing with patients with sexual health problems; and (iii) their need for further training in sexual health during postgraduate training programs. METHODS: The study was based on a collaboration among European societies of trainees in these 4 specialties. An online survey was developed and conducted from January 2015 through June 2016. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported questionnaire. RESULTS: We collected 366 completed surveys from 40 countries. Sexual health training was considered an important or very important part of specialty training by 78.7% of participants. Overall, 62.3% of participants had not received any training in sexual health. Especially in obstetrics and gynecology, the large majority did not have training in sexual health (82.8%), followed by psychiatry (59.8%), urology (58.4%), and endocrinology (56.1%). There were statistically significant differences among specialties in the confidence of participants in managing patients with sexual health problems. In general, trainees and early-career specialists who had received sexual health training felt more confident in dealing with patients with gender dysphoria (P = .011), need for sexual therapy (P = .0004), paraphilic disorders (P = .0003), and sexual dysfunction (P = .0017). CONCLUSIONS: Trainees and early-career specialists found sexual health training important for their future medical practice; however, less than half received it during their postgraduate training. Participants felt more confident in managing patients with sexual health problems when sexual health training was included in the postgraduate training program. Kristufkova A, Pinto Da Costa M, Mintziori G, et al. Sexual Health During Postgraduate Training-European Survey Across Medical Specialties. Sex Med 2018;6:255-262.

Workforce planning and training in Obstetrics and Gynaecology across Europe: A survey of national trainee societies.

OBJECTIVE(S): To describe the infrastructural differences in training in Obstetrics and Gynaecology (ObGyn) across Europe. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive web-based survey of 31 national ObGyn trainee societies representing the 30 member countries of the European Network of Trainees in Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Answers were verified in a telephone interview and only countries which had completed the telephone interview were included in the final analysis. RESULTS: The final analysis included 28 of 31 societies representing 27 countries (response rate 90%). The median formal duration of training was 5 years (range 4-7). There were mandatory requirements in addition to medical school graduation before specialisation could be started in 20 (71%) countries. The job opportunities after completion of training varied and included academic fellowships (n=21 [75%]), clinical fellowships/junior consultancy (n=21 [75%]), consultancy (n=11 [40%]), and private practice (n=23 [82%)]. Training and working as a specialist abroad was uncommon (≤20% in 21 [78%] and 26 [96%] countries respectively). Exams during ObGyn training were offered in 24 (85%) countries. Unemployment after completion of training was rare (<5% in 26 [93%] countries). Assessment of ObGyn specialists took place in 20 (71%) countries. CONCLUSION(S): The study illustrates that there are organisational variations in ObGyn training in Europe; A) The requirements to obtain a training post vary causing differences in the qualifications of trainees starting training. B) The duration of training varies. And C) newly trained specialists carry varying levels of responsibility. The results suggest that the content, organisation, and outcome of training differ across Europe. Differences due to political, social and cultural reasons are expected. However, further harmonisation of training across Europe still seems desirable in order to improve women's healthcare and facilitate the mobility of ObGyn trainees and specialists across Europe. There are currently several European initiatives, however, national and local measures are essential for training to improve.

The effect of maneuvers for shoulder delivery on perineal trauma: a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 85% of vaginal deliveries are accompanied by perineal trauma. The objective of this trial was to compare the incidence of perineal trauma after primary delivery of either the anterior or posterior shoulder during vaginal delivery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a randomized single-blinded trial comparing primary delivery of either the anterior or posterior shoulder in women having their first vaginal delivery. Primary outcome was any perineal trauma. Results were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle and supplemented with a per-protocol and as-treated analysis. RESULTS: Between June 2013 and March 2015, 650 women were randomized, and 543 (posterior, n = 281; anterior, n = 262) were included in the final intention-to-treat analysis. Most group characteristics were similar. The frequency of any perineal trauma did not differ between the two groups (posterior: 91.5%, anterior: 90.5%; odds ratio 1.130, 95% confidence interval 0.628-2.032, p = 0.684). The results did not change after adjustment for basic characteristics with significant group differences (a1 odds ratio 1.174, 95% confidence interval 0.632-2.179, p = 0.612) or predefined risk factors (a2 odds ratio 1.139, 95% confidence interval 0.599-2.166, p = 0.691). The rate of perineal trauma also did not differ between the groups in a "per-protocol" and "as-treated" analysis. CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in the degree of perineal trauma after primary delivery of either the anterior or posterior shoulder. Consequently both maneuvers for shoulder delivery can be used at vaginal delivery, but further trials are warranted before certain methods can be recommended.

Incidence of incisional hernia after cesarean delivery: a register-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incidence of incisional hernias requiring surgical repair after cesarean delivery over a 10-year period. METHODS: This population- and register-based cohort study identified all women in Denmark with no history of previous abdominal surgery who had a cesarean delivery between 1991 and 2000. The cohort was followed from their first until 10 years after their last cesarean delivery within the inclusion period or until the first of the following events: hernia repair, death, emigration, abdominal surgery, or cesarean delivery after the inclusion period. For women who had a hernia repair, hospital records regarding the surgery and previous cesarean deliveries were tracked and manually analyzed to validate the relationship between hernia repair and cesarean delivery. Data were analyzed with a competing risk analysis that included each cesarean delivery. RESULTS: We identified 57,564 women who had had 68,271 cesarean deliveries during the inclusion period. During follow-up, 134 of these women had a hernia requiring repair. Of these 68 (51% [95% CI 42-60%]) were in a midline incision although the transverse incision was the primary approach at cesarean delivery during the inclusion period. The cumulated incidence of a hernia repair within 10 years after a cesarean delivery was 0.197% (95% CI 0.164-0.234%). The risk of a hernia repair was higher during the first 3 years after a cesarean delivery, with an incidence after 3 years of 0.157% (95% CI 0.127-0.187%). CONCLUSIONS: The overall risk of an incisional hernia requiring surgical repair within 10 years after a cesarean delivery was 2 per 1000 deliveries in a population in which the transverse incision was the primary approach at cesarean delivery.

[Evidence-based surgical techniques for caesarean section]. / Operationsteknikker ved section.

Caesarean section (CS) is a common surgical procedure, and in Denmark 21% of deliveries is by CS. There is an increasing amount of scientific evidence to support the different surgical techniques used at CS. This article reviews the literature regarding CS techniques. There is still a lack of evidence especially about the long-term consequences of the surgical techniques.

[Caesarean section may have long-term consequences for both mother and child].

The rate of caesarean section is increasing worldwide. There is scientific evidence that caesarean sections have long-term consequences in consecutive pregnancies and for mother and child. This article reviews these consequences. When consulting women before decision on mode of delivery it is encouraged that all these issues are taken into account and balanced to the benefits of having a caesarean section.

The effect of a preoperative single-dose methylprednisolone on postoperative pain after abdominal hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Methylprednisolone has been shown to have analgesic effects after orthopedic surgery. The objective of this trial was to compare the effect of 125 mg methylprednisolone with placebo on postoperative pain after abdominal hysterectomy. STUDY DESIGN: In this randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled trial women scheduled for elective abdominal hysterectomy (n=59) were randomized to preoperatively receive either 125 mg methylprednisolone or saline intravenously. Primary outcome was postoperative pain measured on a 0.0-10.0 visual analog scale and assessed at rest and during mobilization repeatedly the first 24h and daily on the 2nd to 7th postoperative day. Secondary outcomes were postoperative use of opioids and antiemetics, vomiting, C-reactive protein levels, and time to mobilization and discharge. Repeated measures including the primary outcome were analyzed with linear mixed models. RESULTS: Forty-nine cases were analyzed (methylprednisolone n=25, placebo n=24). Pain scores were significantly higher in the methylprednisolone group compared to the placebo group during mobilization (0.79 [95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.07-1.50] P=0.03) but not at rest (0.55 [95% CI: -0.06 to 1.16] P=0.08). There was no difference between the methylprednisolone and placebo group regarding use of opioids (P=0.24) and antiemetics (P=0.14), number of vomits (P=0.26), and time to mobilization (P=0.24) and discharge (P=0.28). C-reactive protein levels were significantly higher in the placebo group (P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This trial showed no beneficial effect of methylprednisolone on postoperative pain after abdominal hysterectomy. Methylprednisolone significantly lowered postoperative CRP levels. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial.gov: www.clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01106547.