IMplementation of the Preterm Birth Surveillance PAthway: a RealisT evaluation (The IMPART Study).

BACKGROUND: In the UK, 7.6% of babies are born preterm, which the Department of Health aims to decrease to 6% by 2025. To advance this, NHS England released Saving Babies Lives Care Bundle Version 2 Element 5, recommending the Preterm Birth Pathway for women at risk of preterm birth. The success of this new pathway depends on its implementation. The IMPART (IMplementation of the Preterm Birth Surveillance PAthway: a RealisT evaluation) study aimed to research how, why, for whom, to what extent and in what contexts the prediction and prevention aspects of Preterm Birth Surveillance Pathway is implemented through a realist evaluation. Realist implementation studies are growing in popularity. METHODS: Initial programme theories were developed through a realist informed literature scope, interviews with developers of the NHS England guidance, and a national questionnaire of current practice. Implementation theory was utilised in developing the programme theories. Data (interviews and observations with staff and women) were undertaken in 3 case sites in England to 'test' the programme theories. Substantive theory was utilised during data analysis to interpret and refine the theories on how implementation could be improved. RESULTS: Three explanatory areas were developed: risk assessing and referral; the preterm birth surveillance clinic; and women centred care. Explanatory area 1 dealt with the problems in correct risk assessment and referral to a preterm clinic. Explanatory area 2 focused on how once a correct referral has been made to a preterm clinic, knowledgeable and supported clinicians can deliver a well-functioning clinic. Explanatory area 3 concentrated on how the pathway delivers appropriate care to women. CONCLUSIONS: The IMPART study provides several areas where implementation could be improved. These include educating clinicians on knowledge of risk factors and the purpose of the preterm clinic, having a multidisciplinary preterm team (including a preterm midwife) with specialist preterm knowledge and skills (including transvaginal cervical scanning skills), and sites actively working with their local network. This multidisciplinary preterm team are placed to deliver continuity of care for women at high-risk of preterm birth, being attentive to their history but also ensuring they are not defined by their risk status. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN57127874.

Left Atrial Mechanics Following Preeclamptic Pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Preterm preeclampsia is a pregnancy complication associated with myocardial dysfunction and premature cardiovascular disease morbidity and mortality. Left atrial (LA) strain is a noninvasive index of left ventricular end diastolic pressure and an early marker of heart failure risk. This study aimed to evaluate LA strain during the postpartum period in participants with and without preterm preeclampsia and to assess whether this varied in the presence of hypertension and/or cardiac dysfunction. METHODS: In this longitudinal cohort study, 321 women from 28 hospitals with preterm preeclampsia (cases) underwent cardiovascular assessment 6 months postpartum. This is a secondary analysis of the PHOEBE study (ISRCTN01879376). An uncomplicated pregnancy control group (n=30) was recruited from a single center for comparison. A full cross-sectional transthoracic echocardiogram was performed, and from these images, the myocardial strain of the left atrium, including reservoir, conduit, and contractile strain, as well as LA stiffness, were calculated. RESULTS: At 6 months postpartum, compared with controls, prior preeclampsia was associated with a significantly attenuated LA reservoir, conduit, and contractile strain, as well as increased LA stiffness (all P<0.001). LA strain was further reduced in preeclamptic women who had and had not developed hypertension, systolic, or diastolic dysfunction at 6 months postpartum (all P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: LA mechanics were significantly attenuated at 6 months postpartum in participants with preterm preeclampsia, whether or not they remained hypertensive or had evidence of ventricular dysfunction. Further studies are needed to determine whether postnatal LA strain may identify women at greater risk for future cardiovascular disease.

Repeat Placental Growth Factor-Based Testing in Women With Suspected Preterm Preeclampsia: A Stratified Analysis of the PARROT-2 Trial.

BACKGROUND: PlGF (placental growth factor)-based testing reduces severe maternal adverse outcomes. Repeat PlGF-based testing is not associated with improved perinatal or maternal outcomes. This planned secondary analysis aimed to determine whether there is a subgroup of women who benefit from repeat testing. METHODS: Pregnant individuals with suspected preterm preeclampsia were randomized to repeat revealed PlGF-based testing, compared with usual care where testing was concealed. Perinatal and maternal outcomes were stratified by trial group, by initial PlGF-based test result, and by PlGF-based test type (PlGF or sFlt-1 [soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1]/PlGF ratio). RESULTS: A total of 1252 pregnant individuals were included. Abnormal initial PlGF-based test identified a more severe phenotype of preeclampsia, at increased risk of adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes. Repeat testing was not significantly associated with clinical benefit in women with abnormal initial results. Of women with a normal initial result, 20% developed preeclampsia, with the majority at least 3 to 4 weeks after initial presentation. Repeat test results were more likely to change from normal to abnormal in symptomatic women (112/415; 27%) compared with asymptomatic women (163/890; 18%). A higher proportion of symptomatic women who changed from normal to abnormal were diagnosed with preeclampsia, compared with asymptomatic women. CONCLUSIONS: Our results do not demonstrate evidence of the clinical benefit of repeating PlGF-based testing if the initial result is abnormal. Judicious use of repeat PlGF-based testing to stratify risk may be considered at least 2 weeks after a normal initial test result, particularly in women who have symptoms or signs of preeclampsia. REGISTRATION: URL: XXX; Unique identifier: ISRCTN85912420.

Midwife continuity of care models versus other models of care for childbearing women.

BACKGROUND: Midwives are primary providers of care for childbearing women globally and there is a need to establish whether there are differences in effectiveness between midwife continuity of care models and other models of care. This is an update of a review published in 2016. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of midwife continuity of care models with other models of care for childbearing women and their infants. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (17 August 2022), as well as the reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: All published and unpublished trials in which pregnant women are randomly allocated to midwife continuity of care models or other models of care during pregnancy and birth. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed studies for inclusion criteria, scientific integrity, and risk of bias, and carried out data extraction and entry. Primary outcomes were spontaneous vaginal birth, caesarean section, regional anaesthesia, intact perineum, fetal loss after 24 weeks gestation, preterm birth, and neonatal death. We used GRADE to rate the certainty of evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included 17 studies involving 18,533 randomised women. We assessed all studies as being at low risk of scientific integrity/trustworthiness concerns. Studies were conducted in Australia, Canada, China, Ireland, and the United Kingdom. The majority of the included studies did not include women at high risk of complications. There are three ongoing studies targeting disadvantaged women. Primary outcomes Based on control group risks observed in the studies, midwife continuity of care models, as compared to other models of care, likely increase spontaneous vaginal birth from 66% to 70% (risk ratio (RR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.07; 15 studies, 17,864 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), likelyreduce caesarean sections from 16% to 15% (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.99; 16 studies, 18,037 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and likely result in little to no difference in intact perineum (29% in other care models and 31% in midwife continuity of care models, average RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.12; 12 studies, 14,268 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may belittle or no difference in preterm birth (< 37 weeks) (6% under both care models, average RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.16; 10 studies, 13,850 participants; low-certainty evidence). We arevery uncertain about the effect of midwife continuity of care models on regional analgesia (average RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.92; 15 studies, 17,754 participants, very low-certainty evidence), fetal loss at or after 24 weeks gestation (average RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.13; 12 studies, 16,122 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and neonatal death (average RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.71; 10 studies, 14,718 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Secondary outcomes When compared to other models of care, midwife continuity of care models likely reduce instrumental vaginal birth (forceps/vacuum) from 14% to 13% (average RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.96; 14 studies, 17,769 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and may reduceepisiotomy 23% to 19% (average RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.91; 15 studies, 17,839 participants; low-certainty evidence). When compared to other models of care, midwife continuity of care models likelyresult in little to no difference inpostpartum haemorrhage (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.03; 11 studies, 14,407 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and admission to special care nursery/neonatal intensive care unit (average RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.03; 13 studies, 16,260 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in induction of labour (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.00; 14 studies, 17,666 participants; low-certainty evidence), breastfeeding initiation (average RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.12; 8 studies, 8575 participants; low-certainty evidence), and birth weight less than 2500 g (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.08; 9 studies, 12,420 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain about the effect of midwife continuity of care models compared to other models of care onthird or fourth-degree tear (average RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.49; 7 studies, 9437 participants; very low-certainty evidence), maternal readmission within 28 days (average RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.96; 1 study, 1195 participants; very low-certainty evidence), attendance at birth by a known midwife (average RR 9.13, 95% CI 5.87 to 14.21; 11 studies, 9273 participants; very low-certainty evidence), Apgar score less than or equal to seven at five minutes (average RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.24; 13 studies, 12,806 participants; very low-certainty evidence) andfetal loss before 24 weeks gestation (average RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.01; 12 studies, 15,913 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No maternal deaths were reported across three studies. Although the observed risk of adverse events was similar between midwifery continuity of care models and other models, our confidence in the findings was limited. Our confidence in the findings was lowered by possible risks of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision of some estimates. There were no available data for the outcomes: maternal health status, neonatal readmission within 28 days, infant health status, and birth weight of 4000 g or more. Maternal experiences and cost implications are described narratively. Women receiving care from midwife continuity of care models, as opposed to other care models, generally reported more positive experiences during pregnancy, labour, and postpartum. Cost savings were noted in the antenatal and intrapartum periods in midwife continuity of care models. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Women receiving midwife continuity of care models were less likely to experience a caesarean section and instrumental birth, and may be less likely to experience episiotomy. They were more likely to experience spontaneous vaginal birth and report a positive experience. The certainty of some findings varies due to possible risks of bias, inconsistencies, and imprecision of some estimates. Future research should focus on the impact on women with social risk factors, and those at higher risk of complications, and implementation and scaling up of midwife continuity of care models, with emphasis on low- and middle-income countries.

A community-based mentoring scheme for pregnant and parenting adolescents in Sierra Leone: Protocol for a hybrid pilot cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Sierra Leone has a very high maternal mortality rate, and this burden falls heavily on adolescents, a particularly vulnerable group; this is usually driven by poverty, lack of education and employment opportunities. In 2017, a local grassroots organisation, Lifeline Nehemiah Projects, developed a community-based mentoring intervention '2YoungLives' (2YLs) for adolescent girls in Eastern Freetown. We aim to formally assess the feasibility and implementation of the 2YL mentorship scheme in new communities in Sierra Leone. METHODS: A hybrid type 2 pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of the 2YL mentoring scheme in urban and rural communities living around twelve peripheral health units (PHU) across five districts in Sierra Leone. Clusters will be matched into pairs and randomisation will be determined by computer-generated random numbers via a secure web-based system hosted by MedSciNet. All under-eighteen adolescents identified as pregnant in the community and/or the PHU are included. Feasibility (recruitment, retention, and attrition rates; data collection and completeness; sample calculation) and primary clinical outcome data (composite of maternal deaths, stillbirths, neonatal deaths) will be collected. A mixed-methods process evaluation will explore implementation outcomes, mechanisms of change, contextual factors, experiences of care, and health and wellbeing. A concurrent cost-consequence analysis will be undertaken. Main trial analysis will be pragmatic, by intention to treat, and a complementary per protocol analysis will also be included. DISCUSSION: Improving health and wellbeing for adolescent girls (including sexual and reproductive health) remains a top priority in Sierra Leone indicated by several government policies targeted to this group, in which maternal and infant mortality are still persistently high. Supporting these girls and facilitating their wellbeing is imperative, along with sensitisation of communities, strengthening of youth friendly services and collaboration with stakeholders at all levels (government, regional, community, family). We believe 2YL supports the global holistic agenda to integrate and implement interventions across health, education, and social systems in order to protect, nurture, and support the health and development potential of every adolescent girl, and thus become a model of good practice for adolescent pregnancy, to be adopted more widely in Sierra Leone and elsewhere. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN32414369. Prospectively registered on 14/03/2022.

Repeat placental growth factor-based testing in women with suspected preterm pre-eclampsia (PARROT-2): a multicentre, parallel-group, superiority, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Placental growth factor (PlGF)-based testing has high diagnostic accuracy for predicting pre-eclampsia needing delivery, significantly reducing time to diagnosis and severe maternal adverse outcomes. The clinical benefit of repeat PlGF-based testing is unclear. We aimed to determine whether repeat PlGF-based testing (using a clinical management algorithm and nationally recommended thresholds) reduces adverse perinatal outcomes in pregnant individuals with suspected preterm pre-eclampsia. METHODS: In this multicentre, parallel-group, superiority, randomised controlled trial, done in 22 maternity units across England, Scotland, and Wales, we recruited women aged 18 years or older with suspected pre-eclampsia between 22 weeks and 0 days of gestation and 35 weeks and 6 days of gestation. Women were randomly assigned (1:1) to revealed repeat PlGF-based testing or concealed repeat testing with usual care. The intervention was not masked to women or partners, or clinicians or data collectors, due to the nature of the trial. The trial statistician was masked to intervention allocation. The primary outcome was a perinatal composite of stillbirth, early neonatal death, or neonatal unit admission. The primary analysis was by the intention-to-treat principle, with a per-protocol analysis restricted to women managed according to their allocation group. The trial was prospectively registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN 85912420. FINDINGS: Between Dec 17, 2019, and Sept 30, 2022, 1253 pregnant women were recruited and randomly assigned treatment; one patient was excluded due to randomisation error. 625 women were allocated to revealed repeat PlGF-based testing and 627 women were allocated to usual care with concealed repeat PlGF-based testing (mean age 32·3 [SD 5·7] years; 879 [70%] white). One woman in the concealed repeat PlGF-based testing group was lost to follow-up. There was no significant difference in the primary perinatal composite outcome between the revealed repeat PlGF-based testing group (195 [31·2%]) of 625 women) compared with the concealed repeat PlGF-based testing group (174 [27·8%] of 626 women; relative risk 1·21 [95% CI 0·95-1·33]; p=0·18). The results from the per-protocol analysis were similar. There were four serious adverse events in the revealed repeat PlGF-based testing group and six in the concealed repeat PlGF-based testing group; all serious adverse events were deemed unrelated to the intervention by the site principal investigators and chief investigator. INTERPRETATION: Repeat PlGF-based testing in pregnant women with suspected pre-eclampsia was not associated with improved perinatal outcomes. In a high-income setting with a low prevalence of adverse outcomes, universal, routine repeat PlGF-based testing of all individuals with suspected pre-eclampsia is not recommended. FUNDING: Tommy's Charity, Jon Moulton Charitable Trust, and National Institute for Health and Care Research Guy's and St Thomas' Biomedical Research Centre.

Vaginal micronised progesterone for the prevention of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Treatment with vaginal progesterone reduces the risk of miscarriage and preterm birth in selected high-risk women. The hypothesis that vaginal progesterone can reduce the risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) is unexplored. OBJECTIVES: To summarise the evidence on the effectiveness of vaginal progesterone to reduce the risk of HDP. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched Embase (OVID), MEDLINE (OVID), PubMed, CENTRAL and clinicaltrials.gov from inception until 20 June 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included placebo-controlled randomised trials (RCTs) of vaginal progesterone for the prevention or treatment of any pregnancy complications. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted absolute event numbers for HDP and pre-eclampsia in women receiving vaginal progesterone or placebo, and meta-analysed the data with a random effects model. We appraised the certainty of the evidence using GRADE methodology. MAIN RESULTS: The quantitative synthesis included 11 RCTs, of which three initiated vaginal progesterone in the first trimester, and eight in the second or third trimesters. Vaginal progesterone started in the first trimester of pregnancy lowered the risk of any HDP (risk ratio [RR] 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53-0.93, 2 RCTs, n = 4431 women, I2 = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence) and pre-eclampsia (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.41-0.92, 3 RCTs, n = 5267 women, I2 = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence) when compared with placebo. Vaginal progesterone started in the second or third trimesters was not associated with a reduction in HDP (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.67-2.12, 3 RCTs, n = 1602 women, I2 = 9%; low-certainty evidence) or pre-eclampsia (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.71-1.31, 5 RCTs, n = 4274 women, I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence). CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review found first-trimester initiated vaginal micronised progesterone may reduce the risk of HDP and pre-eclampsia.

Experiences of Impacted Foetal Head: Findings from a Pragmatic Focus Group Study of Mothers and Midwives.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to explore the lived experiences of caesarean birth complicated by impaction of the foetal head, for mothers and midwives. METHODS: A pragmatic, qualitative, focus group study of mixed-participants was conducted, face-to-face. They were postpartum women (n = 4), midwives (n = 4), and a postpartum midwife (n = 1) who had experience of either providing care for impacted foetal head, and/or had experienced it during their own labour, in Fife, United Kingdom. Data were transcribed and were analysed using template analysis. RESULTS: Three main themes emerged through analysis: (i) current knowledge of impacted foetal head; (ii) current management of impacted foetal head; and (iii) experiences and outcomes of impacted foetal head. Each theme was made up of various initial codes when data were analysed inductively. Finally, each theme could be overlaid onto the three core principles of the Tydeman Tube: (1) to improve outcomes for mother and baby in the second stage of labour; (2) to reduce the risk of trauma to mother and baby in complicated births; and (3) to increase respectful care for women in labour; thus allowing for a neat analytic template. CONCLUSION: A lack of consensus regarding definition, management, and training were highlighted by the midwives. Women anticipated caesarean birth in late labour as straightforward and were therefore unaware of this potential complication. Women and midwives would welcome any new device to facilitate delivery of the impacted foetal head (IFH) as long as it is fully evaluated prior to widespread introduction. Women were not averse to being part of this evaluation process.

Outcomes following elective cerclage versus ultrasound surveillance in women with one prior preterm event.

OBJECTIVE: Preterm birth, defined as delivery before 37 weeks' gestation, is a major obstetric challenge and is associated with serious long-term complications in those infants that survive. Preventative management includes cervical cerclage, either as an elective procedure or performed following transvaginal ultrasound surveillance and shortening of the cervix (≤25 mm). Significant questions remain regarding the optimal management, target population and technique. Therefore, this study aimed to assess differences in risk factors and pregnancy outcomes for women who received an elective cerclage versus ultrasound surveillance, following one prior premature event (spontaneous preterm birth/second trimester loss). STUDY DESIGN: Women were retrospectively identified from St Thomas's Hospital Preterm Birth Clinical Network Database. Women who had one prior premature event (between 14+0 and 36+6 weeks' gestation) were included and they were separated into those that an elective cerclage and those who underwent ultrasound surveillance to assess differences in demographics, pregnancy risk factors and preterm birth outcomes. We excluded women who received other preventative therapies. We also separately analysed those women who required an ultrasound-indicated cerclage, comparing the differences between women that delivered preterm and term. RESULTS: We collected data from 1077 women who had a prior preterm event. 66 women received an elective cerclage. 11.4% of women who had ultrasound surveillance received an ultrasound indicated cerclage. Women with a prior history of mid-trimester loss, instead of preterm birth, were more likely to receive an elective cerclage. The mean gestational age of delivery was similar between those women who received an elective cerclage and those who had ultrasound surveillance with and without an ultrasound-indicated cerclage (38+1 vs 37+1), however, preterm birth rates <37 weeks' were twice as high in this ultrasound group (OR 2.3 [1.1-4.5], p = 0.02). In those women that do require an ultrasound-indicated cerclage, 50.4% deliver preterm. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, this study shows that in women with one prior preterm event, both history-indicated cerclage and ultrasound surveillance are appropriate management options. The majority of women undergoing ultrasound surveillance did not require a cerclage and so avoided the potential perioperative complications of cerclage insertion. However, those that did require an ultrasound-indicated cerclage were at high risk of preterm birth so should be followed up closely to enable adequate preterm birth preparation. Further prospective studies comparing history indicated cerclage and US surveillance in women with one prior preterm event are necessary.

Amniotic fluid sludge is associated with earlier preterm delivery and raised cervicovaginal interleukin 8 concentrations.

BACKGROUND: Preterm birth is the leading cause of global neonatal mortality. Amniotic fluid sludge, thought to indicate intra-amniotic infection, may have potential as a clinical biomarker of preterm birth risk. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze whether the presence of amniotic fluid sludge in pregnant participants with a known short cervical length can help improve the understanding of the etiology and guide management choice. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study analyzing the effects of amniotic fluid sludge presence on the risk of preterm birth in high-risk asymptomatic pregnant participants with a short cervical length (<25 mm) at a large tertiary referral maternity center in London. Amniotic fluid sludge was detected on a routine transvaginal ultrasound scan. RESULTS: Overall, 147 pregnant participants with a short cervical length were identified, 54 of whom had amniotic fluid sludge. Compared with pregnant participants without amniotic fluid sludge, pregnant participants with amniotic fluid sludge were more likely to have a short cervical length (19 vs 14 mm, respectively; P<.0001) and increased cervicovaginal fetal fibronectin concentrations at diagnosis (125 vs 45 ng/mL, respectively; P=.0006). Pregnant participants with amniotic fluid sludge were at increased risk of midtrimester loss and delivery before 24 weeks of gestation (relative risk, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-10.3). Furthermore, this study showed that pregnant participants with amniotic fluid sludge have increased cervicovaginal interleukin 8 concentrations, supporting the concept of amniotic fluid sludge as an indicator of an inflammatory response to microbial invasion (P=.03). Neonatal outcomes were similar between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: In our cohort of high-risk asymptomatic pregnant participants with a short cervical length, the presence of amniotic fluid sludge is associated with an increased risk of delivery before 24 weeks of gestation. Moreover, pregnant participants with amniotic fluid sludge were more likely to have raised fetal fibronectin levels and inflammatory cytokines, particularly interleukin 8, in the cervicovaginal fluid, supporting the concept that amniotic fluid sludge is associated with an infective or inflammatory process. Future research should aim to further establish the clinical significance of amniotic fluid sludge presence and guide subsequent management.

Planned delivery or expectant management for late preterm pre-eclampsia in low-income and middle-income countries (CRADLE-4): a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Pre-eclampsia is a leading cause of maternal and perinatal mortality. Evidence regarding interventions in a low-income or middle-income setting is scarce. We aimed to evaluate whether planned delivery between 34+ 0 and 36+ 6 weeks' gestation can reduce maternal mortality and morbidity without increasing perinatal complications in India and Zambia. METHODS: In this parallel-group, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial, we compared planned delivery versus expectant management in women with pre-eclampsia from 34+ 0 to 36+ 6 weeks' gestation. Participants were recruited from nine hospitals and referral facilities in India and Zambia and randomly assigned to planned delivery or expectant management in a 1:1 ratio by a secure web-based randomisation facility hosted by MedSciNet. Randomisation was stratified by centre and minimised by parity, single-fetus pregnancy or multi-fetal pregnancy, and gestational age. The primary maternal outcome was a composite of maternal mortality or morbidity with a superiority hypothesis. The primary perinatal outcome was a composite of one or more of: stillbirth, neonatal death, or neonatal unit admission of more than 48 h with a non-inferiority hypothesis (margin of 10% difference). Analyses were by intention to treat, with an additional per-protocol analysis for the perinatal outcome. The trial was prospectively registered with ISRCTN, 10672137. The trial is closed to recruitment and all follow-up has been completed. FINDINGS: Between Dec 19, 2019, and March 31, 2022, 565 women were enrolled. 284 women (282 women and 301 babies analysed) were allocated to planned delivery and 281 women (280 women and 300 babies analysed) were allocated to expectant management. The incidence of the primary maternal outcome was not significantly different in the planned delivery group (154 [55%]) compared with the expectant management group (168 [60%]; adjusted risk ratio [RR] 0·91, 95% CI 0·79 to 1·05). The incidence of the primary perinatal outcome by intention to treat was non-inferior in the planned delivery group (58 [19%]) compared with the expectant management group (67 [22%]; adjusted risk difference -3·39%, 90% CI -8·67 to 1·90; non-inferiority p<0·0001). The results from the per-protocol analysis were similar. There was a significant reduction in severe maternal hypertension (adjusted RR 0·83, 95% CI 0·70 to 0·99) and stillbirth (0·25, 0·07 to 0·87) associated with planned delivery. There were 12 serious adverse events in the planned delivery group and 21 in the expectant management group. INTERPRETATION: Clinicians can safely offer planned delivery to women with late preterm pre-eclampsia, in a low-income or middle-income country. Planned delivery reduces stillbirth, with no increase in neonatal unit admissions or neonatal morbidity and reduces the risk of severe maternal hypertension. Planned delivery from 34 weeks' gestation should therefore be considered as an intervention to reduce pre-eclampsia associated mortality and morbidity in these settings. FUNDING: UK Medical Research Council and Indian Department of Biotechnology.

Longitudinal change in cervical length following vaginal or abdominal cervical cerclage: a randomized comparison.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cerclage has been shown to reduce the risk of recurrent spontaneous preterm birth in a high-risk patient population; however, the mechanism is not well understood. Transabdominal cerclage is superior to low and high vaginal cerclage in reducing early spontaneous preterm birth and fetal loss in women with previous failed vaginal cerclage. Cervical length measurements are commonly used to monitor high-risk women and may explain the mechanism of success. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the rate of change in longitudinal cervical length after randomized placement of low transvaginal, high transvaginal, or transabdominal cerclage in women with a previous failed vaginal cerclage. STUDY DESIGN: This was a planned analysis of longitudinal transvaginal ultrasound cervical length measurements from patients enrolled in the Vaginal Randomised Intervention of Cerclage trial, a randomized controlled trial comparing transabdominal cerclage or high transvaginal cerclage with low transvaginal cerclage. Cervical length measurements at specific gestational ages were compared over time and between groups, using generalized estimating equations fitted using the maximum-likelihood random-effects estimator. In addition, cervical length measurements were compared in women with transabdominal cerclage placed before and during pregnancy. The diagnostic accuracy of cervical length as a predictor of spontaneous preterm birth at <32 weeks of gestation was explored. RESULTS: This study included 78 women who underwent longitudinal cervical length assessment (70% of the analyzed cohort) with a history of failed cerclage, of whom 25 (32%) were randomized to low transvaginal cerclage, 26 (33%) to high transvaginal cerclage, and 27 (35%) to transabdominal cerclage. Abdominal cerclage was superior to low (P=.008) and high (P=.001) vaginal cerclage at maintaining cervical length over the surveillance period (14 to 26 weeks of gestation) (+0.08 mm/week, 95% confidence interval, -0.40 to 0.22; P=.580). On average, the cervical length was 1.8 mm longer by the end of the 12-week surveillance period in women with transabdominal cerclage (+1.8 mm; 95% confidence interval, -7.89 to 4.30; P=.564). High vaginal cerclage was no better than low cervical cerclage in the prevention of cervical shortening; the cervix shortened by 13.2 mm over 12 weeks in those with low vaginal cerclage (95% confidence interval, -21.7 to -4.7; P=.002) and by 20 mm over 12 weeks in those with high vaginal cerclage (95% confidence interval, -33.1 to -7.4; P=.002). Preconception transabdominal cerclage resulted in a longer cervix than those performed during pregnancy; this difference was significant after 22 weeks of gestation (48.5 mm vs 39.6 mm; P=.039). Overall, cervical length was an excellent predictor of spontaneous preterm birth at <32 weeks of gestation (receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-1.00). CONCLUSION: In women with a previous failed cervical cerclage, in the next pregnancy, the cervical length in women treated with vaginal cerclage funneled and shortened over time, whereas there was preservation of cervical length in women who receive transabdominal cerclage. Cervical length remained longer in transabdominal procedures performed before pregnancy than in transabdominal procedures performed during pregnancy. Overall, cervical length was an excellent predictor of spontaneous preterm birth in our cohort. Our findings may explain the mechanism of benefit for transabdominal cerclage, with its high placement better maintaining the structural integrity of the cervix at the level of the internal os.

Cervical cerclage technique: what do experts actually achieve?

BACKGROUND: Cervical cerclage is a recognized intervention in the management of women at risk of preterm birth and midtrimester loss. The mechanism of action of cerclage is unclear, and the technique has been poorly researched. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate cerclage technique among experienced obstetricians, using a previously developed and evaluated cerclage simulator. STUDY DESIGN: This prospective experimental simulation and observational study used identical simulators for 28 consultant obstetricians who were asked to perform their normal cerclage. Suture type, height, knot site, and free thread length were recorded. Using computed tomography, depth of bite and tension (by reduction in area of cervix) were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 52 cervical cerclages were completed (Mersilene tape, n=20; monofilament suture, n=32). Mean suture height was 33 mm (standard deviation, 7.7 mm), greater with monofilament suture than with Mersilene tape, and associated with smaller needle size. Mean depth of bite and mean reduction of starting area did not differ by suture type. Seven procedures showed ≥1 suture bite that had entered the cervical canal once or more. CONCLUSION: This study assessed cerclage technique of experienced obstetricians using simulators and computed tomography imaging, and demonstrated wide variation in technique; this may affect the efficacy of the procedure. Further work should establish optimal technique and consensus for training and clinical practice.

'A prospective case control study to evaluate shock index for identifying patients at risk of clinically important malaria in refugee settings'.

Bidibidi Refugee Settlement's 223,000 refugees are vulnerable to malaria due to crowded conditions and limited healthcare access. Early identification and referral of suspected cases is key to reduce morbidity and mortality. We evaluated the shock index (heart rate/ systolic blood pressure) for detection of abnormal vital signs, calculated by the CRADLE Vital Signs Alert device, which can be used in routine patient blood pressure and heart rate assessment by non-medically trained Voluntary Health Team workers. The single most frequent diagnosis causing shock was malaria, and thus the device was useful to detect severe cases (as well as discovering other cases), after calculating appropriate shock indices.

How are hospitals in England caring for women at risk of preterm birth in 2021? The influence of national guidance on preterm birth care in England: a national questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: National guidance (Saving Babies Lives Care Bundle Version 2 (SBLCBv2) Element 5) was published in 2019, with the aim to standardise preterm care in England. We plan to identify how many preterm birth surveillance clinics there are in England, and to define current national management in caring for women who are both asymptomatic and high-risk of preterm birth, and who arrive symptomatically in threatened preterm labour, to assist preterm management both nationally and internationally. METHODS: An online survey comprising of 27 questions was sent to all maternity units in England between February 2021 to July 2021. RESULTS: Data was obtained from 96 units. Quantitative analysis and free text analysis was then undertaken. We identified 78 preterm birth surveillance clinics in England, an increase from 30 preterm clinics in 2017. This is a staggering 160% increase in 4 years. SBLCBv2 has had a considerable impact in increasing preterm birth surveillance clinic services, with the majority (61%) of sites reporting that the NHS England publication influenced their unit in setting up their clinic. Variations exist at every step of the preterm pathway, such as deciding which risk factors warrant referral, distinguishing within particular risk factors, and offering screening tests and treatment options. CONCLUSIONS: While variations in care still do persist, hospitals have done well to increase preterm surveillance clinics, under the difficult circumstances of the COVID pandemic and many without specific additional funding.

A continuity of care programme for women at risk of preterm birth in the UK: Process evaluation of a hybrid randomised controlled pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: The development and evaluation of specific maternity care packages designed to address preterm birth remains a public health priority. We aim to evaluate the implementation, context, and potential mechanisms of action, of a new care pathway that combined midwifery continuity of care with a specialist obstetric clinic for women at risk of preterm birth (POPPIE) in London (UK). METHODS: We did a multiphase mixed method triangulation evaluation nested within a hybrid type 2, randomised controlled trial in London (United Kingdom). Pregnant women with identified risk factors for preterm birth were eligible for trial participation and randomly assigned (1:1) to either midwifery continuity of care linked to a specialist obstetric clinic (POPPIE group) or standard maternity care. The primary outcome was a composite of appropriate and timely interventions for the prevention and/or management of preterm labour and birth, analysed according to intention to treat. Clinical and process outcome data were abstracted from medical records and electronic data systems, and coded by study team members, who were masked to study group allocation. Implementation data were collected from meeting records and key documents, postnatal surveys (n = 164), semi-structured interviews with women (n = 30), healthcare providers and stakeholders (n = 24) pre-, mid and post implementation. Qualitative and quantitative data from meeting records and key documents were examined narratively. Qualitative data from interviews were analysed using three thematic frameworks: Proctor's (for implementation outcomes: appropriateness, adoption, feasibility, acceptability, fidelity, penetration, sustainability), the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (for determinants of implementation), and published program theories of continuity models (for potential mechanisms). Data triangulation followed a convergent parallel and pragmatic approach which brought quantitative and qualitative data together at the interpretation stage. We averaged individual implementation measures across all domains to give a single composite implementation strength score which was compared to the primary outcome. RESULTS: Between May 9, 2017, and Sep 30, 2018, 553 women were assessed for eligibility and 334 were enrolled with less than 6% of loss to follow up (169 were assigned to the POPPIE group; 165 were to the standard group). There was no difference in the primary outcome (POPPIE group 83·3% versus standard group 84·7%; risk ratio 0·98 [95% CI 0·90 to 1·08]). Appropriateness and adoption: The introduction of the POPPIE model was perceived as a positive fundamental change for local maternity services. Partnership working and additional funding were crucial for adoption. Fidelity: More than 75% of antenatal and postnatal visits were provided by a named or partner midwife, and a POPPIE midwife was present in more than 80% of births. Acceptability: Nearly 98% of women who responded to the postnatal survey were very satisfied with POPPIE model. Quantitative fidelity and acceptability results were supported by the qualitative findings. Penetration and sustainability: Despite delays (likely associated with lack of existing continuity models at the hospital), the model was embedded within established services and a joint decision was made to sustain and adapt the model after the trial (strongly facilitated by national maternal policy on continuity pathways). Potential mechanisms of impact identified included e.g. access to care, advocacy and perceptions of safety and trust. There was no association between implementation measures and the primary outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The POPPIE model of care was a feasible and acceptable model of care that was implemented with high fidelity and sustained in maternity services. Larger powered trials are feasible and needed in other settings, to evaluate the impact and implementation of continuity programmes in other communities affected by preterm birth and women who experience social disadvantage and vulnerability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UKCRN Portfolio Database (prospectively registered, 24 April 2017): 31951. ISRCTN registry (retrospectively registered, 21 August 2017): ISRCTN37733900.

Optimising timing of steroid administration in preterm pre-eclampsia.

Antenatal corticosteroids (ACS) are an established intervention to improve outcomes in preterm birth. ACS are optimally timed if the administration-to-birth interval is greater than 24 h and <7 days. Evidence has emerged suggesting harm associated with administration-to-birth intervals greater than seven days, or with repeated courses of ACS. Pre-eclampsia is a leading cause of iatrogenic preterm birth, as delivery of the fetus and placenta remains the only cure. This study investigated optimal ACS use in women delivering before 35 weeks' gestation in the United Kingdom with a diagnosis of preterm pre-eclampsia. Of 1,632 women with suspected pre-eclampsia, 250 delivered before 35 weeks' gestation with pre-eclampsia. 31 % (78/250) received optimally timed ACS, 49 % (122/250) received ACS more than seven days pre-delivery and 20 % (50/250) did not receive ACS. There were no significant differences in gestational age, mean birthweight, respiratory distress syndrome, neonatal unit admission or neonatal death between groups. There was a higher rate of intrauterine fetal death in the group of women who did not receive ACS (p < 0.05), and a corresponding increase in vaginal delivery and reduction in caesarean section (p < 0.05). Optimal ACS administration is poor in women delivering preterm with pre-eclampsia and the largest group of mistimed ACS administration were those given more than 7 days prior to birth. Clinicians should defer ACS until a decision for delivery has been made, at which point ACS should be prioritised. Judicious use of ACS may improve outcomes.