Antenatal vaccination against Group B streptococcus: attitudes of pregnant women and healthcare professionals in the UK towards participation in clinical trials and routine implementation.

INTRODUCTION: Maternal vaccination is increasingly part of antenatal care in the UK and worldwide. Trials of Group B streptococcus vaccines are ongoing. This study investigated the attitudes of pregnant women and healthcare professionals towards antenatal vaccination, both in routine care and a clinical trial setting. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Survey of 269 pregnant women, 273 midwives/obstetricians and 97 neonatal doctors across seven sites in the UK assessing attitudes towards antenatal vaccinations, knowledge of Group B streptococcus, a hypothetical Group B streptococcus vaccine, and participation in clinical vaccine trials. RESULTS: 68% of pregnant women intended to receive a vaccine during their current pregnancy (183/269) and 43% (of all respondents, 115/269) reported they would be very/fairly likely to accept a vaccine against Group B streptococcus despite only 29% (55/269) knowing what Group B streptococcus was. This increased to 69% after additional information about Group B streptococcus was provided. Twenty-four percent of pregnant women reported they would be likely to take part in a clinical trial of an unlicensed Group B streptococcus vaccine. Fifty-nine percent of maternity professionals and 74% of neonatologists would be likely to recommend participation in a Group B streptococcus vaccine trial to women, with the vast majority (>99%) willing to be involved in such a study. Incentives to take part cited by pregnant women included extra antenatal scans and the opportunity to be tested for Group B streptococcus. CONCLUSION: Pregnant women and healthcare professionals were open to the idea of an antenatal Group B streptococcus vaccine and involvement in clinical trials of such a vaccine. Education and support from midwives would be key to successful implementation.

Factors influencing women's attitudes towards antenatal vaccines, group B Streptococcus and clinical trial participation in pregnancy: an online survey.

OBJECTIVES: To explore factors influencing the likelihood of antenatal vaccine acceptance of both routine UK antenatal vaccines (influenza and pertussis) and a hypothetical group B Streptococcus (GBS) vaccine in order to improve understanding of how to optimise antenatal immunisation acceptance, both in routine use and clinical trials. SETTING: An online survey distributed to women of childbearing age in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: 1013 women aged 18-44 years in England, Scotland and Wales. METHODS: Data from an online survey conducted to gauge the attitudes of 1013 women of childbearing age in England, Scotland and Wales to antenatal vaccination against GBS were further analysed to determine the influence of socioeconomic status, parity and age on attitudes to GBS immunisation, using attitudes to influenza and pertussis vaccines as reference immunisations. Factors influencing likelihood of participation in a hypothetical GBS vaccine trial were also assessed. RESULTS: Women with children were more likely to know about each of the 3 conditions surveyed (GBS: 45% vs 26%, pertussis: 79% vs 63%, influenza: 66% vs 54%), to accept vaccination (GBS: 77% vs 65%, pertussis: 79% vs 70%, influenza: 78% vs 68%) and to consider taking part in vaccine trials (37% vs 27% for a hypothetical GBS vaccine tested in 500 pregnant women). For GBS, giving information about the condition significantly increased the number of respondents who reported that they would be likely to receive the vaccine. Health professionals were the most important reported source of information. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing awareness about GBS, along with other key strategies, would be required to optimise the uptake of a routine vaccine, with a specific focus on informing women without previous children. More research specifically focusing on acceptability in pregnant women is required and, given the value attached to input from healthcare professionals, this group should be included in future studies.

Guidelines for prevention and control of group A streptococcal infection in acute healthcare and maternity settings in the UK.

Hospital outbreaks of group A streptococcal (GAS) infection can be devastating and occasionally result in the death of previously well patients. Approximately one in ten cases of severe GAS infection is healthcare-associated. This guidance, produced by a multidisciplinary working group, provides an evidence-based systematic approach to the investigation of single cases or outbreaks of healthcare-associated GAS infection in acute care or maternity settings. The guideline recommends that all cases of GAS infection potentially acquired in hospital or through contact with healthcare or maternity services should be investigated. Healthcare workers, the environment, and other patients are possible sources of transmission. Screening of epidemiologically linked healthcare workers should be considered for healthcare-associated cases of GAS infection where no alternative source is readily identified. Communal facilities, such as baths, bidets and showers, should be cleaned and decontaminated between all patients especially on delivery suites, post-natal wards and other high risk areas. Continuous surveillance is required to identify outbreaks which arise over long periods of time. GAS isolates from in-patients, peri-partum patients, neonates, and post-operative wounds should be saved for six months to facilitate outbreak investigation. These guidelines do not cover diagnosis and treatment of GAS infection which should be discussed with an infection specialist.

The local adaptation of national recommendations for preventing early-onset neonatal Group B Streptococcal disease in UK maternity units.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate how UK maternity unit protocols conformed to national recommendations for preventing early-onset neonatal Group B Streptococcal (GBS) disease. METHODS: In December 2005, all UK obstetric maternity units were contacted and asked to provide a copy of their protocol on preventing GBS disease. Information was extracted on the protocol's recommendations, its development date and the evidence cited. The protocol's recommendations were then compared against the recommendations in the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) guideline. RESULTS: Protocols were obtained for 171 of the 227 units (75%), of which 120 were developed after the guideline has been published. There were 134 protocols (78%) that followed the RCOG prevention strategy, recommending a risk-based approach to selecting women for intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP). However, the sets of risk factors named as indications for IAP differed between the protocols and only 34 of these 134 protocols were entirely consistent with the guideline. The 37 protocols (22%) that did not follow the RCOG prevention strategy recommended IAP for some risk factors but only if a bacteriological test was also GBS positive. CONCLUSIONS: There are considerable differences in the GBS protocols used in maternity units in the UK despite the availability of a national guideline. Consequently, some high-risk women may not receive IAP while some women without risk factors are treated needlessly. While local adaptation may be for legitimate reasons, the processes used in some units seem to require improvement.

Acute myocardial infarction during pregnancy successfully treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

We report a case of a 40 year old pregnant woman who presented with an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by ventricular fibrillation. She underwent successful primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). With a tendency towards increased maternal age in developed countries, AMI during pregnancy may become a more frequent occurrence.

Major placenta praevia should not preclude out-patient management.

OBJECTIVE: To review current management of women with major and minor placenta praevia in view of the recommendations made in the RCOG guideline 2001. To assess whether out-patient care was detrimental to pregnancy outcome. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective observational study at the Simpson Memorial Maternity Pavilion, Edinburgh (a tertiary referral centre). One hundred and sixty-one women with major and minor placenta praevia between 1994 and 2000 were separated into those who experienced bleeding (antepartum haemorrhage (APH)) and those who had no bleeding during pregnancy (non-APH). Statistical analysis was carried out using SPSS. RESULTS: There were 129 women (80%) in the APH group. Forty-three were out-patients at the time of delivery and 63% had a major degree of praevia. Thirty-two women were in the non-APH group. Sixty-eight were managed as out-patients and 50% had a major degree of praevia. Women with a major degree of praevia were not significantly more likely to experience bleeding. Women with APH were significantly more likely to be delivered early, by emergency caesarean section (C/S), of lower birthweight babies who required neonatal admission than the non-APH group. CONCLUSION: There is a place for out-patient management of women with placenta praevia. Caution is required with increasing number of bleeds but not degree of praevia.