The Impact of Low Workplace Support During Pregnancy on Surgeon Distress and Career Dissatisfaction.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the impact of lack of workplace support (LOWS) for obstetric health on surgeon distress and career satisfaction. BACKGROUND: Although most pregnant surgeons desire clinical duty reductions to mitigate obstetric risk, few modify their schedules due to low workplace support. METHODS: US surgeons with at least one live birth completed an electronic survey. LOWS during pregnancy was defined as (1) disagreeing that colleagues/leadership were supportive of obstetric-mandated bedrest; (2) feeling unable to reduce clinical duties despite health concerns due to risk of financial penalties, requirement to make up missed call shifts, being perceived as "weak", burdening colleagues, or accommodations being denied by the workplace. Multivariate logistic regression determined the association between LOWS and burnout, low quality of life, plans to leave clinical practice or to reduce work hours, and likelihood of recommending a surgical career to one's child. RESULTS: Of 557 surgeons, the 360 (64.6%) who reported LOWS during pregnancy were more likely to report burnout (OR:2.57; 95%CI:1.60-4.13), low quality of life (OR:1.57; 95%CI:1.02-2.41), a desire to leave their practice (OR:2.74; 95%CI: 1.36-5.49), plans to reduce clinical hours in the next year (OR:4.25; 95%CI:1.82-9.90), and were less likely to recommend their career to their child (OR:0.44; 95%CI:0.28-0.70). CONCLUSIONS: LOWS for maternal-fetal health concerns is associated with burnout, low quality of life, and career dissatisfaction. The work environment is a modifiable factor requiring system-level interventions to limit clinical work during pregnancy and provide fair compensation for covering surgeons. Supporting surgeons during pregnancy is a short-term investment with long-term implications for improving longevity and diversity of the workforce.

Delivery at an inadequate level of maternal care is associated with severe maternal morbidity.

BACKGROUND: Implementing levels of maternal care is one strategy proposed to reduce maternal morbidity and mortality. The levels of maternal care framework outline individual medical and obstetrical comorbidities, along with hospital resources required for individuals with these different comorbidities to deliver safely. The overall goal is to match individuals to hospitals so that all birthing people get appropriate resources and personnel during delivery to reduce maternal morbidity. OBJECTIVE: This study examined the association between delivery in a hospital with an inappropriate level of maternal care and the risk of experiencing severe maternal morbidity. STUDY DESIGN: The 40 birthing hospitals in Massachusetts were surveyed using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Levels of Care Assessment Tool. We linked individual delivery hospitalizations from the Massachusetts Pregnancy to Early Life Longitudinal Data System to hospital-level data from the Levels of Care Assessment Tool surveys. Level of maternal care guidelines were used to outline 16 high-risk conditions warranting delivery at hospitals with resources beyond those considered basic (level I) obstetrical care. We then used the Levels of Care Assessment Tool assigned levels to determine if delivery occurred at a hospital that had the resources to meet an individual's needs (ie, if a patient received risk-appropriate care). We conducted our analyses in 2 stages. First, multivariable logistic regression models predicted if an individual delivered in a hospital that did not have the resources for their risk condition. The main explanatory variable of interest was if the hospital self-assessed their level of maternal care to be higher than the Levels of Care Assessment Tool assigned level. We then used logistic regression to examine the association between delivery at an inappropriate level hospital and the presence of severe maternal morbidity at delivery. RESULTS: Among 64,441 deliveries in Massachusetts from January 1 to December 31, 2019, 33.2% (21,415/64,441) had 1 or more of the 16 high-risk conditions that require delivery at a center designated as a level I or higher. Of the 21,415 individuals with a high-risk condition, 13% (2793/21,415), equating to 4% (2793/64,441) of the entire sample, delivered at an inappropriate level of maternal care. Birthing individuals with high-risk conditions who delivered at a hospital with an inappropriate level had elevated odds (adjusted odds ratio, 3.34; 95% confidence interval, 2.24-4.96) of experiencing severe maternal morbidity after adjusting for patient comorbidities, demographics, average hospital severe maternal morbidity rate, hospital level of maternal care, and geographic region. CONCLUSION: Birthing people who delivered in a hospital with risk-inappropriate resources were substantially more likely to experience severe maternal morbidity. Delivery in a hospital with a discrepancy in their self-assessment and the Levels of Care Assessment Tool assigned level substantially predicted delivery in a hospital with an inappropriate level of maternal care, suggesting inadequate knowledge of hospitals' resources and capabilities. Our data demonstrate the potential for the levels of maternal care paradigm to decrease severe maternal morbidity while highlighting the need for robust implementation and education to ensure everyone receives risk-appropriate care.

Cardiogenic Shock and Utilization of Mechanical Circulatory Support in Pregnancy.

Maternal mortality rates are rising in the United States, a trend which is in contrast to that seen in other high-income nations. Cardiovascular disease and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy are consistently the leading causes of maternal mortality both in the United States and globally, accounting for about one-quarter to one-third of maternal and peripartum deaths. A large proportion of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality stems from acquired disease in the context of cardiovascular risk factors, which include obesity, pre-existing diabetes and hypertension, and inequities in care from maternal care deserts and structural racism. Patients may also become pregnant with preexisting structural heart disease, or acquire disease throughout pregnancy (ex: spontaneous coronary artery dissection, peripartum cardiomyopathy), and be at higher risk of pregnancy-related cardiovascular complications. While risk-stratification tools including the modified World Health Organization (mWHO) classification, Cardiac Disease in Pregnancy (CARPREG II) and Zwangerschap bij Aangeboren HARtAfwijking/Pregnancy in Women with Congenital Heart Disease (ZAHARA) have been designed to help physicians identify patients at increased risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes and who may therefore benefit from referral to a tertiary care center, the limitation of these scores is their predominant focus on patients with known preexisting heart disease. As such, identifying patients at risk for pregnancy complications presents a significant challenge, and it is often patients with high-risk cardiovascular substrates prior to or during pregnancy who are at a highest risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes including cardiogenic shock.

Point of care maternal ultrasound in obstetrics.

Ultrasound is the hallmark imaging modality traditionally used by obstetricians for fetal diagnosis and surveillance. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the role of point of care ultrasound for expeditious assessment of the maternal cardiopulmonary status. The familiarity of obstetricians with ultrasound, coupled with the availability of ultrasound equipment without the need to transport the patient, make point of care ultrasound particularly valuable in the labor and delivery unit. The rising contribution of cardiopulmonary disorders to maternal morbidity and mortality carves out many potential applications for point of care ultrasound during labor and delivery. Obstetricians have access to the technology and the skills to obtain the basic views required to assess for the presence of pulmonary edema, ventricular dysfunction, or intra-abdominal free fluid. Point of care ultrasound can be used routinely for the evaluation of pulmonary complaints or in the assessment of hypotension and may play an essential role in the diagnosis and management of life-threatening emergencies such as shock, an amniotic fluid embolism, or cardiac arrest. We reviewed the currently established point of care ultrasound protocols for the evaluation of cardiopulmonary complaints through the lens of the obstetrician. We call on educators and academic leaders to incorporate maternal point of care ultrasound teachings into existing curricula. Point of care ultrasound is of enormous value for providers with limited access to diagnostic imaging or subspecialty providers. With the growing complexity of the obstetrical population, acquiring the clinical skills to meet these evolving needs is a requisite step in the ongoing efforts to reduce maternal morbidity and mortality.

Innovating Evaluation and Treatment of Intrapartum Fevers: Where Do We Go from Here?

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..

Lack of Workplace Support for Obstetric Health Concerns is Associated With Major Pregnancy Complications: A National Study of US Female Surgeons.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess whether lack of workplace support for clinical work reductions during pregnancy was associated with major pregnancy complications. BACKGROUND: Surgeons are at high risk of major pregnancy complications. Although rigorous operative schedules pose increased risk, few reduce their clinical duties during pregnancy. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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.

The Long Road to Parenthood: Assisted Reproduction, Surrogacy, and Adoption Among US Surgeons.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to characterize demographics, costs, and workplace support for surgeons using assisted reproductive technology (ART), adoption, and surrogacy to build their families. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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%, P < 0.001), have fewer children (1.9 vs. 2.4, p < 0.001), 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, P < 0.001) with age > 35 years associated with greater odds of ART use (odds ratio 3.90; 95% confidence interval 2.74-5.55, P < 0.001). 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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.

Diabetes mellitus, maternal adiposity, and insulin-dependent gestational diabetes are associated with COVID-19 in pregnancy: the INTERCOVID study.

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.

Effects of prenatal exposure to maternal COVID-19 and perinatal care on neonatal outcome: results from the INTERCOVID Multinational Cohort Study.

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, P<.01) and pregnancy-related complications, such as hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and fetal distress (all with P<.001), than women without COVID-19 diagnosis. Maternal diagnosis of COVID-19 carried an increased rate of preterm birth (P≤.001) and lower neonatal weight (P≤.001), length, and head circumference at birth. In mothers with COVID-19 diagnosis, the length of in utero exposure was significantly correlated to the risk of the neonate testing positive (odds ratio, 4.5; 95% confidence interval, 2.2-9.4 for length of in utero exposure >14 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.

Timing of Delivery in Women with Cardiac Disease.

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 < 0.001), there was no difference in high-risk cardiac or obstetric characteristics. No difference in composite cardiac morbidity was found (4.8 vs. 3.5%, p = 0.24). Women in the early term group were more likely to undergo cesarean delivery than women in the term group (43.4 vs. 24.7%, p = 0.004). 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: · Question of delivery timing in women with cardiac disease.. · No difference in cardiac morbidity, term versus early term.. · Term delivery in women with asymptomatic cardiac disease..

Critical care in obstetrics: a strategy for addressing maternal mortality.

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.

Preeclampsia and COVID-19: results from the INTERCOVID prospective longitudinal study.

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-21st 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.

Provider Attitudes on Regionalization of Maternity Care: A National Survey.

OBJECTIVES: To explore provider perspectives surrounding national guidelines proposing regionalization of maternal care. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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 < 0.01). Financial factors (60.3%), geography (48.9%), and access to care (43.2%) were the most cited major barriers to regionalization. High-volume providers endorsed geography as a major barrier more often than low-volume providers (57.8% v. 43.8%, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE: Obstetricians may agree with the concept of regionalized maternity care but also identify significant barriers to its implementation. Early and frequent engagement of providers reflecting the diversity of delivery centers in a region is a simple but necessary step in any attempts to designate levels of maternal care.

Motivational interviewing to promote long-acting reversible contraception among Rwandan couples wishing to prevent or delay pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Few family-planning programs in Africa base demand creation and service delivery on theoretical models. Motivational interviewing is a counseling modality that facilitates reflection on the benefits and disadvantages of a health outcome to encourage behavior change. OBJECTIVES: We evaluate a couples-focused joint family-planning and HIV counseling intervention using motivational interviewing to enhance uptake of long-acting reversible contraception (Paragard copper intrauterine device or Jadelle hormonal implant) among Rwandan couples. STUDY DESIGN: In this experimental study, couples receiving care at 8 government health clinics in Kigali, the capital city, were referred from a parent study of couples who did not want more children or wanted to wait at least 2 years for their next pregnancy. Long-acting reversible contraception methods were offered on site following joint HIV testing and family-planning counseling. At the first follow-up visit 1 month after enrollment in the parent study, couples who had not yet chosen a long-acting reversible contraception method were interviewed separately using motivational interviewing and then brought together and again offered long-acting reversible contraception. RESULTS: Following motivational interviewing, 78 of 229 couples (34%) requested a long-acting reversible contraception method (68 implant and 10 intrauterine device). Long-acting reversible contraception uptake after motivational interviewing was associated with the woman being Catholic (vs Protestant/Muslim/other, adjusted odds ratio, 2.87, 95% confidence interval, 1.19-6.96, P = .019) or having an income (vs no income, adjusted odds ratio, 2.54, 95% confidence interval, 1.12-5.73, P = .025); the couple having previously discussed long-acting reversible contraception (adjusted odds ratio, 8.38, 95% confidence interval, 2.54-27.59, P = .0005); either partner believing that unplanned pregnancy was likely with their current method (adjusted odds ratio, 6.67, 95% confidence interval, 2.77-16.11, P < .0001); or that they might forget to take or make an appointment for their current method (adjusted odds ratio, 4.04, 95% confidence interval, 1.32-12.34, P = .014). Neither partner mentioning that condoms also prevent HIV/sexually transmitted infection was associated with long-acting reversible contraception uptake (adjusted odds ratio, 2.86, 95% confidence interval, 1.17-7.03, P = .022), as was the woman citing long-term duration of action of the implant as an advantage (adjusted odds ratio, 5.41, 95% confidence interval, 1.86-15.76, P = .002). The woman not listing any side effects or disadvantages of implants was associated with long-acting reversible contraception uptake (adjusted odds ratio, 5.42, 95% confidence interval, 2.33-12.59, P < .0001). Clinic location (rural vs urban), couple HIV status, and concerns about negative economic effects of an unplanned pregnancy were significant in bivariate but not multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Encouraging couples to reflect on the benefits and disadvantages of long-acting reversible contraception methods, the likelihood of unplanned pregnancy with their current contraception, and the impact of an unplanned pregnancy is an effective motivational interviewing technique in family-planning counseling. One third of couples who did not want a pregnancy for at least 2 years but had not chosen a long-acting reversible contraception method when provided with standard family-planning counseling did so after motivational interviewing. Involving the male partner in family-planning discussions facilitates joint decision making about fertility goals and contraceptive choice. Combining family planning and joint HIV testing for couples allows targeted focus on dual-method use with discordant couples, who are advised to use condoms for HIV/sexually transmitted infection prevention along with a more effective contraceptive for added protection against unplanned pregnancy.

Planned vaginal delivery and cardiovascular morbidity in pregnant women with heart disease.

BACKGROUND: Although consensus guidelines on the management of cardiovascular disease in pregnancy reserve cesarean delivery for obstetric indications, there is a paucity of data to support this approach. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to compare cardiovascular and obstetric morbidity in women with cardiovascular disease according to the plan for vaginal birth or cesarean delivery. STUDY DESIGN: We assembled a prospective cohort of women delivering at an academic tertiary care center with a protocolized multidisciplinary approach to management of cardiovascular disease between September 2011 and December 2016. Our practice is to encourage vaginal birth in women with cardiovascular disease unless there is an obstetric indication for cesarean delivery. We allow women attempting vaginal birth a trial of Valsalva in the second stage with the ability to provide operative vaginal delivery if pushing leads to changes in hemodynamics or symptoms. Women were classified according to planned mode of delivery: either vaginal birth or cesarean delivery. We then used univariate analysis to compare adverse outcomes according to planned mode of delivery. The primary composite cardiac outcome of interest included sustained arrhythmia, heart failure, cardiac arrest, cerebral vascular accident, need for cardiac surgery or intervention, or death. Secondary obstetric and neonatal outcomes were also considered. RESULTS: We included 276 consenting women with congenital heart disease (68.5%), arrhythmias (11.2%), connective tissue disease (9.1%), cardiomyopathy (8.0%), valvular disease (1.4%), or vascular heart disease (1.8%) at or beyond 24 weeks' gestation. Seventy-six percent (n = 210) planned vaginal birth and 24% (n = 66) planned cesarean delivery. Women planning vaginal birth had lower rates of left ventricular outflow tract obstruction, multiparity, and preterm delivery. All women attempting vaginal birth were allowed Valsalva. Among planned vaginal deliveries 86.2% (n = 181) were successful, with a 9.5% operative vaginal delivery rate. Five women underwent operative vaginal delivery for the indication of cardiovascular disease without another obstetric indication at the discretion of the delivering provider. Four of these patients tolerated trials of Valsalva ranging from 15 to 75 minutes prior to delivery. Adverse cardiac outcomes were similar between planned vaginal birth and cesarean delivery groups (4.3% vs 3.0%, P = 1.00). Rates of postpartum hemorrhage (1.9% vs 10.6%, P < .01) and transfusion (1.9% vs 9.1%, P = .01) were lower in the planned vaginal birth group. There were no differences in adverse cardiac, obstetric, or neonatal outcomes in the cohort overall or the subset of women with high-risk cardiovascular disease or a high burden of obstetric comorbidity. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that cesarean delivery does not reduce adverse cardiovascular outcomes and lend support to a planned vaginal birth for the majority of women with cardiovascular disease including those with high-risk disease.

Uptake of long acting reversible contraception following integrated couples HIV and fertility goal-based family planning counselling in Catholic and non-Catholic, urban and rural government health centers in Kigali, Rwanda.

BACKGROUND: When 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). METHODS: In 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. RESULTS: Of 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 < 0.0001), in urban clinics (82% vs. 67% in rural clinics, p < 0.0001), and in HIV concordant couples (79% vs. 70% of discordant couples, 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. CONCLUSIONS: Fertility 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.

Impact of Pregnancy on Ventricular Strain in Women with Repaired Tetralogy of Fallot.

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.

Putting It All Together: Clinical Considerations in the Care of Critically Ill Obstetric Patients with COVID-19.

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..

A comorbidity-based screening tool to predict severe maternal morbidity at the time of delivery.

BACKGROUND: The obstetric comorbidity index summarizes the burden of maternal comorbidities into a single number and holds promise as a maternal risk-assessment tool. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the clinical performance of this comorbidity-based screening tool to accurately identify women on labor and delivery who are at risk of severe maternal morbidity on labor and delivery in real time. STUDY DESIGN: All patients with pregnancies ≥23 weeks gestation presenting to labor and delivery at a single tertiary-care center from February through July 2018 were included in the study. The patient's primary labor and delivery nurse assessed patient comorbidities and calculated the patient's obstetric comorbidity index. The score was recalculated at each 12-hour shift change. A multidisciplinary panel of clinicians determined whether patients experienced severe maternal morbidity based on the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine consensus definition, blinded to the patient's obstetric comorbidity index score. We analyzed the association between the obstetric comorbidity index score and the occurrence of severe maternal morbidity. RESULTS: The study included 2828 women, of whom 1.73% experience severe maternal morbidity (n=49). The obstetric comorbidity index ranged from 0-15 for women in the study cohort, with a median obstetric comorbidity index of 1 (interquartile range, 0-3). The median obstetric comorbidity index score for women who experienced the severe maternal morbidity was 5 (interquartile range, 3-7) compared with a median of 1 (interquartile range, 0-3) for those without severe maternal morbidity (P<.01). The frequency of severe maternal morbidity increased from 0.41% for those with a score of 0 to 18.75% for those with a score ≥9. For every 1-point increase in the score, patients experienced a 1.55 increase in odds of severe maternal morbidity (95% confidence interval, 1.42-1.70). The c-statistic for the obstetric comorbidity index score was 0.83 (95% confidence interval, 0.76-0.89), which indicated strong discrimination. CONCLUSION: The obstetric comorbidity index can prospectively identify women at risk of severe maternal morbidity in a clinical setting. A particular strength of the obstetric comorbidity index is its ability to integrate multiple compounding comorbidities and highlight the cumulative risk that is associated with the patients' conditions. Routine clinical use of the obstetric comorbidity index has the potential to identify at-risk women whose condition warrants increased surveillance and targeted care to prevent adverse maternal outcomes.

Obstetric Comorbidity and Severe Maternal Morbidity Among Massachusetts Delivery Hospitalizations, 1998-2013.

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.