"We All Want to Be Able to Tell You Something Hopeful": Clinicians' Experiences Providing Maternal-Fetal Surgery Counseling.

INTRODUCTION: Prenatal counseling about maternal-fetal surgery can be traumatic and confusing for pregnant people. It can also be technically and emotionally complex for clinicians. As maternal-fetal surgery rapidly advances and becomes more common, more evidence is needed to inform counseling practices. The objective of this study was to develop a deeper understanding of the methods clinicians currently use to train for and provide counseling, as well as their needs and recommendations for future education and training. METHODS: We used interpretive description methods and interviewed interprofessional clinicians who regularly counsel pregnant people about maternal-fetal surgery. RESULTS: We conducted 20 interviews with participants from 17 different sites who were maternal-fetal medicine specialists (30%), pediatric surgeons (30%), nurses (15%), social workers (10%), a genetic counselor (5%), a neonatologist (5%), and a pediatric subspecialist (5%). Most were female (70%), non-Hispanic white (90%), and practiced in the Midwest (50%). We identified four overarching themes: (1) contextualizing maternal-fetal surgery counseling; (2) establishing shared understanding; (3) supporting decision-making; and (4) training for maternal-fetal surgery counseling. Within these themes, we identified key practice differences among professions, specialties, institutions, and regions. CONCLUSION: Participants are committed to practicing informative and supportive counseling to empower pregnant people to make autonomous decisions about maternal-fetal surgery. Nevertheless, our findings indicate a dearth of evidence-based communication practices and guidance. Participants identified significant systemic limitations affecting pregnant people's decision-making options related to maternal-fetal surgery.

"I don't have a telephone to the fetus": Clinicians' conceptions of fetal patienthood in maternal-fetal surgery counseling.

RATIONALE: Maternal fetal surgery (MFS) has developed rapidly since the 1960s and centers for fetal diagnosis and therapy (CFDT) have proliferated. As a result, CFDT clinicians have intervened with fetuses through pregnant bodies for decades, yet the patienthood status of the fetus and its implications for the pregnant person's autonomy have been relatively unexamined. OBJECTIVE: Our overall research aims were threefold: (1) to explore how clinicians train for and provide counseling for MFS; (2) to examine how clinicians assess fetal patienthood and its implications; and (3) to understand clinicians' professed needs and their recommendations for education and training for the provision of MFS counseling. This focuses on aim two. METHOD: In this qualitative study, conducted using in-depth interviews, we examined how 20 clinicians from 17 different sites understood fetal patienthood, how that affected their counseling of pregnant patients, and whether they drew on extant ethical frameworks for guidelines. RESULTS: We identified three major themes: 1) Clinicians entered fetal surgery consultations with assumptions about fetal patienthood (frequently informed by beliefs about fetal viability, maternal attachment, and disciplinary perspectives); 2) they consciously assessed their pregnant patients' connections to their fetus to inform or re-calibrate their own understandings of fetal patienthood; and 3) they used a threshold -based conceptualization whereby the fetus achieved patienthood after crossing a symbolic boundary, often related to the clinician's ability to intervene. CONCLUSIONS: Few clinicians invoked an extant ethical framework to determine fetal patienthood; most asserted that they did not view directive counseling toward MFS as appropriate, instead working diligently to protect pregnant patients' autonomy and rights to self-determination.

Positive Autism Screening Rates in Toddlers Born During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Stress and viral illness during pregnancy are associated with neurodevelopmental conditions in offspring. Autism screening positivity for children born during the pandemic remains unknown. Objective: To examine associations between prenatal exposure to the pandemic milieu and maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection with rates of positive Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers, Revised (M-CHAT-R) screenings. Design, Setting, and Participants: Data for this cohort study were drawn from the COVID-19 Mother Baby Outcomes (COMBO) Initiative. M-CHAT-R scores obtained from children aged 16 to 30 months during routine clinical care at Columbia University Irving Medical Center in New York City were abstracted from electronic health records (EHRs) for children born between January 2018 and September 2021 (COMBO-EHR cohort). Separately, the M-CHAT-R was administered at 18 months for children born between February 2020 and September 2021 through a prospective longitudinal study (COMBO-RSCH cohort). Prenatal pandemic exposure (birth after March 1, 2020) and maternal SARS-CoV-2 status during pregnancy was determined through EHRs. Data were analyzed from March 2022 to June 2024. Exposures: Prenatal exposures to the pandemic milieu and maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was rate of positive M-CHAT-R screenings. For all primary analyses, unadjusted χ2 tests and adjusted logistic regression models were performed. Results: The COMBO-EHR cohort included 1664 children (442 born before the pandemic and 1222 born during the pandemic; 997 SARS-CoV-2 unexposed, 130 SARS-CoV-2 exposed, and 95 with unknown SARS-CoV-2 exposure status), of whom 266 (16.0%) were Black, 991 (59.6%) were Hispanic, 400 (24.0%) were White, 1245 (74.8%) were insured through Medicaid, 880 (52.9%) were male, and 204 (12.3%) were born prematurely. The COMBO-RSCH cohort included 385 children (74 born before the pandemic and 311 born during the pandemic; 201 SARS-CoV-2 unexposed, 101 SARS-CoV-2 exposed, and 9 with unknown SARS-CoV-2 exposure status), of whom 39 (10.1%) were Black, 168 (43.6%) were Hispanic, 157 (40.8%) were White, 161 (41.8%) were insured through Medicaid, 222 (57.7%) were male, and 38 (9.9%) were born prematurely. Prenatal pandemic exposure was not associated with a higher positive M-CHAT-R screening rate in either the COMBO-EHR or COMBO-RSCH cohort. Prenatal exposure to maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a lower rate of M-CHAT-R positivity in the COMBO-EHR cohort (12.3% [16 children] vs 24.0% [239 children]; adjusted odds ratio, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22-0.68; P = .001), but no association was found in the COMBO-RSCH cohort (12.9% [13 children] vs 19.9% [40 children]; adjusted odds ratio, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.24-1.04; P = .07). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of 2 groups of children with prenatal pandemic exposure and/or exposure to maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection, neither exposure was associated with greater M-CHAT-R positivity.

Assessment of Neurodevelopment in Infants With and Without Exposure to Asymptomatic or Mild Maternal SARS-CoV-2 Infection During Pregnancy.

Importance: Associations between prenatal SARS-CoV-2 exposure and neurodevelopmental outcomes have substantial public health relevance. A previous study found no association between prenatal SARS-CoV-2 infection and parent-reported infant neurodevelopmental outcomes, but standardized observational assessments are needed to confirm this finding. Objective: To assess whether mild or asymptomatic maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection vs no infection during pregnancy is associated with infant neurodevelopmental differences at ages 5 to 11 months. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included infants of mothers from a single-site prospective cross-sectional study (COVID-19 Mother Baby Outcomes [COMBO] Initiative) of mother-infant dyads and a multisite prospective cohort study (Epidemiology of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 in Pregnancy and Infancy [ESPI]) of pregnant individuals. A subset of ESPI participants was subsequently enrolled in the ESPI COMBO substudy. Participants in the ongoing COMBO study were enrolled beginning on May 26, 2020; participants in the ESPI study were enrolled from May 7 to November 3, 2021; and participants in the ESPI COMBO substudy were enrolled from August 2020 to March 2021. For the current analysis, infant neurodevelopment was assessed between March 2021 and June 2022. A total of 407 infants born to 403 mothers were enrolled (204 from Columbia University Irving Medical Center in New York, New York; 167 from the University of Utah in Salt Lake City; and 36 from the University of Alabama in Birmingham). Mothers of unexposed infants were approached for participation based on similar infant gestational age at birth, date of birth, sex, and mode of delivery to exposed infants. Exposures: Maternal symptomatic or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: Infant neurodevelopment was assessed using the Developmental Assessment of Young Children, second edition (DAYC-2), adapted for telehealth assessment. The primary outcome was age-adjusted standard scores on 5 DAYC-2 subdomains: cognitive, gross motor, fine motor, expressive language, and receptive language. Results: Among 403 mothers, the mean (SD) maternal age at delivery was 32.1 (5.4) years; most mothers were of White race (240 [59.6%]) and non-Hispanic ethnicity (253 [62.8%]). Among 407 infants, 367 (90.2%) were born full term and 212 (52.1%) were male. Overall, 258 infants (63.4%) had no documented prenatal exposure to SARS-CoV-2 infection, 112 (27.5%) had confirmed prenatal exposure, and 37 (9.1%) had exposure before pregnancy or at an indeterminate time. In adjusted models, maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy was not associated with differences in cognitive (ß = 0.31; 95% CI, -2.97 to 3.58), gross motor (ß = 0.82; 95% CI, -1.34 to 2.99), fine motor (ß = 0.36; 95% CI, -0.74 to 1.47), expressive language (ß = -1.00; 95% CI, -4.02 to 2.02), or receptive language (ß = 0.45; 95% CI, -2.15 to 3.04) DAYC-2 subdomain scores. Trimester of exposure and maternal symptom status were not associated with DAYC-2 subdomain scores. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, results of a novel telehealth-adapted observational neurodevelopmental assessment extended a previous finding of no association between prenatal exposure to maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection and infant neurodevelopment. Given the widespread and continued high prevalence of COVID-19, these data offer information that may be helpful for pregnant individuals who experience asymptomatic or mild SARS-CoV-2 infections.

Association of Birth During the COVID-19 Pandemic With Neurodevelopmental Status at 6 Months in Infants With and Without In Utero Exposure to Maternal SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

Importance: Associations between in utero exposure to maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection and neurodevelopment are speculated, but currently unknown. Objective: To examine the associations between maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy, being born during the COVID-19 pandemic regardless of maternal SARS-CoV-2 status, and neurodevelopment at age 6 months. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cohort of infants exposed to maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy and unexposed controls was enrolled in the COVID-19 Mother Baby Outcomes Initiative at Columbia University Irving Medical Center in New York City. All women who delivered at Columbia University Irving Medical Center with a SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy were approached. Women with unexposed infants were approached based on similar gestational age at birth, date of birth, sex, and mode of delivery. Neurodevelopment was assessed using the Ages & Stages Questionnaire, 3rd Edition (ASQ-3) at age 6 months. A historical cohort of infants born before the pandemic who had completed the 6-month ASQ-3 were included in secondary analyses. Exposures: Maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy and birth during the COVID-19 pandemic. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes were scores on the 5 ASQ-3 subdomains, with the hypothesis that maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy would be associated with decrements in social and motor development at age 6 months. Results: Of 1706 women approached, 596 enrolled; 385 women were invited to a 6-month assessment, of whom 272 (70.6%) completed the ASQ-3. Data were available for 255 infants enrolled in the COVID-19 Mother Baby Outcomes Initiative (114 in utero exposed, 141 unexposed to SARS-CoV-2; median maternal age at delivery, 32.0 [IQR, 19.0-45.0] years). Data were also available from a historical cohort of 62 infants born before the pandemic. In utero exposure to maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection was not associated with significant differences on any ASQ-3 subdomain, regardless of infection timing or severity. However, compared with the historical cohort, infants born during the pandemic had significantly lower scores on gross motor (mean difference, -5.63; 95% CI, -8.75 to -2.51; F1,267 = 12.63; P<.005), fine motor (mean difference, -6.61; 95% CI, -10.00 to -3.21; F1,267 = 14.71; P < .005), and personal-social (mean difference, -3.71; 95% CI, -6.61 to -0.82; F1,267 = 6.37; P<.05) subdomains in fully adjusted models. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, birth during the pandemic, but not in utero exposure to maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection, was associated with differences in neurodevelopment at age 6 months. These early findings support the need for long-term monitoring of children born during the COVID-19 pandemic.