Association between morbidity among term newborns and low-risk caesarean delivery rates.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between county-level caesarean delivery (CD) rates among women at low risk and morbidity among term newborns. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Population-based study of US county-level birth data from 2015 to 2017. POPULATION: Nulliparous women with term, singleton, vertex-presenting infants (NTSV) at low risk for morbidity. METHODS: The primary exposure was county-level CD rates. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome was morbidity among the low-risk NTSV cohort, categorised as severe (5-minute Apgar score of ≤3, assisted ventilation for ≥6 hours, severe neurologic injury or seizure, transfer or death) or moderate (5-minute Apgar score of <7 but >3, administration of antibiotics or assisted ventilation at delivery). We used linear regression models to determine the association between county NTSV CD and neonatal morbidity rates with cluster robust standard errors. RESULTS: The analysis included data from 2 753 522 births in 952 counties from all 48 states. The mean NTSV CD rate was 23.6% (standard deviation 4.8%). The median severe and moderate neonatal morbidity rates were 15.2 (interquartile range, IQR 9.4-23.6) and 52.5 (IQR 33.4-75.7) per 1000 births, respectively. In the unadjusted analysis using the risk-adjusted exposure and outcome, every percentage point increase in the CD rate of a county was associated with 0.6 (95% CI -0.9, -0.3) and 2.3 fewer (95% CI -3.4, -1.1) cases of severe and moderate neonatal morbidity per 1000 live births. After adjustment for other county factors, the relationships remained significant. These findings were tested in multiple sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Lower county-level NTSV CD rates were associated with a small increase in morbidity among term newborns in the USA. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Lower county-level caesarean delivery rates were associated with an increase in morbidity among term newborns in the USA.

Protocol-Driven Intensive Outpatient Management of Pregnant Patients With Symptomatic Coronavirus Disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: Reports of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection have focused on pregnant women hospitalized due to moderate to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) or asymptomatic women diagnosed through universal screening at the time of obstetric admission. Many pregnant women who have symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection may not meet criteria for hospitalization; however, whether and how these women can be managed safely in outpatient setting is not well described. METHODS: We sought to describe the time to symptom and viral clearance and to identify predictors of hospitalization to better understand the safety of monitoring pregnant patients with symptomatic COVID-19 in the outpatient setting. We performed a retrospective cohort study of pregnant patients with symptomatic, confirmed COVID-19 illness at a large, academic medical center. Patients had systematic telehealth follow up by a clinician team to assess for symptoms, provide virtual prenatal care, and arrange in-person visits when appropriate in a dedicated outpatient center. Data were collected via chart abstraction. RESULTS: Of 180 pregnant patients presenting with symptoms and undergoing reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing, 67 patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection were identified during the study period. Nineteen (28%) required acute care given worsening of COVID-19 symptoms, and 95% of these were directed to this acute care setting due to symptom severity telehealth evaluation. Nine women (13%) were admitted to the hospital given worsening symptoms, 3 required intensive care unit care, 2 required ventilatory support, and 2 required delivery. Women with the presenting symptoms of fever, cough, shortness of breath, chest pain, or nausea and vomiting were more likely to require admission. The median duration from initial positive test to RT-PCR viral clearance was 26 days. Disease progression, time to viral clearance, and duration of symptoms did not vary significantly by trimester of infection. CONCLUSIONS: Management of the majority of pregnant women with symptomatic COVID-19 illness can be accomplished in the outpatient setting with intensive and protocol-driven monitoring for symptom progression.

Hospital volume and cesarean delivery among low-risk women in a nationwide sample.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine if hospital delivery volume was associated with a patient's risk for cesarean delivery in low-risk women. STUDY DESIGN: This study retrospectively examines a cohort of 1 657 495 deliveries identified in the 2013 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Hospitals were stratified by delivery volume quartiles. Low-risk patients were identified using the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine definition (n=845 056). A multivariable logistic regression accounting for hospital-level clustering was constructed to assess the factors affecting a patient's odds for cesarean delivery. RESULTS: The range of cesarean delivery rates was 2.4-51.2% among low-risk patients, and the median was 16.5% (IQR 12.8-20.5%). The cesarean delivery rate was higher in the top two-volume-quartile hospitals (17.4 and 18.2%) compared to the bottom quartiles (16.4 and 16.3%) (P<0.001). Hospital volume was not associated with a patient's odds for cesarean delivery after adjusting for patient and other hospital characteristics (P=0.188). CONCLUSION: Hospital delivery volume is not an independent predictor of cesarean delivery in this population.

Impact of antidepressant treatment during pregnancy on obstetric outcomes among women previously treated for depression: an observational cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of pharmacologic treatment for depression on obstetric outcomes in women treated for depression during the 2 years prior to pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN: Observational cohort study among 2859 women treated for depression during the 2 years prior to pregnancy. The primary exposure was any antidepressant treatment during pregnancy. Secondary analyses examined the impact of treatment by period of antidepressant exposure. Multivariable logistic regression models as well as propensity score analysis was utilized. RESULTS: Among 2859 women, 1648 (58%) were treated with antidepressant medication during pregnancy. Women who received antidepressants had no difference in preterm and early-term deliveries, Apgar scores, and small for gestational age (SGA); they had a lower likelihood of breastfeeding (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 0.69, (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.51 to 0.94)). In secondary analysis, women who used antidepressants all three trimesters who delivered at term were more likely to deliver early term (AOR 1.36, (95% CI: 1.09 to 1.72)). Women who were treated with antidepressants only during the first and second trimesters had a reduced likelihood of SGA (AOR: 0.51 (95% CI: 0.32 to 0.83)). Generally similar results were observed with propensity score analysis. CONCLUSION: Antidepressant exposure during pregnancy does not confer an increased risk of preterm birth nor growth restriction in women recently treated for depression, but also does not appear to markedly improve these outcomes.

Sociodemographic and attitudinal predictors of simultaneous and redundant multiple marker and cell-free DNA screening among women aged ⩾35 years.

OBJECTIVE: To identify characteristics associated with undergoing cell-free DNA (cfDNA) and multiple marker screening (MMS) simultaneously or redundantly (after receiving negative results from the first screening test) among women aged ⩾35 years. STUDY DESIGN: Participants presenting for prenatal testing completed a questionnaire that included measures of pregnancy worry and attitudes toward potential testing outcomes; data on prenatal test use was obtained via medical record review. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with redundant or simultaneous screening. RESULTS: Among 164 participants, 69 (42.1%) had cfDNA redundantly (n=51) to, or simultaneously (n=18) with, MMS. Compared with the 46 MMS-negative women who did not undergo further testing, those who underwent redundant or simultaneous cfDNA/MMS screening were more likely to have annual family incomes >$150 000, to feel having a miscarriage would be worse than having an intellectually disabled child, to desire comprehensive testing for intellectual disability and to have more pregnancy worry. CONCLUSION: Providers who counsel patients on prenatal aneuploidy screening tests should explain the appropriate utilization of these screening tests to avoid unnecessary or minimally informative use of multiple tests.

Absence of evidence for increase in risk for autism or attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder following antidepressant exposure during pregnancy: a replication study.

Multiple studies have examined the risk of prenatal antidepressant exposure and risk for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) or attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), with inconsistent results. Precisely estimating such risk, if any, is of great importance in light of the need to balance such risk with the benefit of depression and anxiety treatment. We developed a method to integrate data from multiple New England health systems, matching offspring and maternal health data in electronic health records to characterize diagnoses and medication exposure. Children with ASD or ADHD were matched 1:3 with children without neurodevelopmental disorders. Association between maternal antidepressant exposure and ASD or ADHD liability was examined using logistic regression, adjusting for potential sociodemographic and psychiatric confounding variables. In new cohorts of 1245 ASD cases and 1701 ADHD cases, along with age-, sex- and socioeconomic status matched controls, neither disorder was significantly associated with prenatal antidepressant exposure in crude or adjusted models (adjusted odds ratio 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.50-1.54 for ASD; 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.53-1.69 for ADHD). Pre-pregnancy antidepressant exposure significantly increased risk for both disorders. These results suggest that prior reports of association between prenatal antidepressant exposure and neurodevelopmental disease are likely to represent a false-positive finding, which may arise in part through confounding by indication. They further demonstrate the potential to integrate data across electronic health records studies spanning multiple health systems to enable efficient pharmacovigilance investigation.

Prenatal antidepressant exposure is associated with risk for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder but not autism spectrum disorder in a large health system.

Previous studies suggested that risk for Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) may be increased in children exposed to antidepressants during the prenatal period. The disease specificity of this risk has not been addressed and the possibility of confounding has not been excluded. Children with ASD or attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) delivered in a large New England health-care system were identified from electronic health records (EHR), and each diagnostic group was matched 1:3 with children without ASD or ADHD. All children were linked with maternal health data using birth certificates and EHRs to determine prenatal medication exposures. Multiple logistic regression was used to examine association between prenatal antidepressant exposures and ASD or ADHD risk. A total of 1377 children diagnosed with ASD and 2243 with ADHD were matched with healthy controls. In models adjusted for sociodemographic features, antidepressant exposure prior to and during pregnancy was associated with ASD risk, but risk associated with exposure during pregnancy was no longer significant after controlling for maternal major depression (odds ratio (OR) 1.10 (0.70-1.70)). Conversely, antidepressant exposure during but not prior to pregnancy was associated with ADHD risk, even after adjustment for maternal depression (OR 1.81 (1.22-2.70)). These results suggest that the risk of autism observed with prenatal antidepressant exposure is likely confounded by severity of maternal illness, but further indicate that such exposure may still be associated with ADHD risk. This risk, modest in absolute terms, may still be a result of residual confounding and must be balanced against the substantial consequences of untreated maternal depression.

Perinatal morbidity associated with late preterm deliveries compared with deliveries between 37 and 40 weeks of gestation.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the risk of short-term complications in neonates born between 34 and 36 weeks of gestation. DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Deliveries in 2005 in the USA. POPULATION: Singleton live births between 34 and 40 weeks of gestation. METHODS: Gestational age was subgrouped into 34, 35, 36 and 37-40 completed weeks of gestation. Statistical comparisons were performed using chi-square test and multivariable logistic regression models, with 37-40 weeks of gestation designated as referent. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Perinatal morbidities, including 5-minute Apgar scores, hyaline membrane disease, neonatal sepsis/antibiotics use, and admission to the intensive care unit. RESULTS: In all, 175,112 neonates were born between 34 and 36 weeks in 2005. Compared with neonates born between 37 and 40 weeks, neonates born at 34 weeks had higher odds of 5-minute Apgar <7 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 5.51, 95% CI 5.16-5.88), hyaline membrane disease (aOR 10.2, 95% CI 9.44-10.9), mechanical ventilation use >6 hours (aOR 9.78, 95% CI 8.99-10.6) and antibiotic use (aOR 9.00, 95% CI 8.43-9.60). Neonates born at 35 weeks were similarly at risk of morbidity, with higher odds of 5-minute Apgar <7 (aOR 3.42, 95% CI 3.23-3.63), surfactant use (aOR 3.74, 95% CI 3.21-4.22), ventilation use >6 hours (aOR 5.53, 95% CI 5.11-5.99) and neonatal intensive-care unit admission (aOR 11.3, 95% CI 11.0-11.7). Neonates born at 36 weeks remain at higher risk of morbidity compared with deliveries at 37-40 weeks of gestation. CONCLUSIONS: Although the risk of undesirable neonatal outcomes decreases with increasing gestational age, the risk of neonatal complications in late preterm births remains higher compared with infants delivered at 37-40 weeks of gestation.

Diagnosis and morbidity of placenta accreta.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the diagnostic precision of ultrasound examination for placenta accreta in women with placenta previa and to compare the morbidity associated with accreta to that of previa alone. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of all women with previa with/without accreta examined at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) between 2002 and 2008. The sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV) of ultrasound examination for the diagnosis of accreta were calculated and compared with results from similar studies in the literature. Univariable analysis was used to compare clinical outcomes. RESULTS: The PPV of an ultrasound diagnosis of accreta was 68% and NPV was 98%. Ultrasound had a sensitivity of 89.5%. Compared with previa alone, accreta had an odds ratio (OR) of 89.6 (95% CI, 19.44-412.95) for estimated blood loss > 2 L, an OR of 29.6 (95% CI, 8.20-107.00) for transfusion and an OR of 8.52 (95% CI, 2.58-28.11) for length of hospital stay > 4 days. CONCLUSION: Placenta accreta is associated with greater morbidity than is placenta previa alone. Ultrasound examination is a good diagnostic test for accreta in women with placenta previa. This is consistent with most other studies in the literature.