Association of inpatient postpartum recovery with patient-reported outcome measures following hospital discharge: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between the quality of inpatient versus outpatient obstetric postpartum recovery is under-explored. We examined the association between inpatient reported quality of recovery with outpatient global recovery, pain severity, pain interference, anxiety, and depression screening scores postpartum. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter observational cohort study of women in labor who underwent vaginal, operative vaginal, or intrapartum cesarean birth. Subjects completed baseline assessments of pain, social support, anxiety, and depression in early labor. We assessed the Obstetric Quality of Recovery-10 (ObsQoR-10) on the day of discharge and the ObsQoR-10, Global Health Scale (GHVAS; 0-100), Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) on postpartum day seven. We hypothesized that the ObsQoR-10 scores at discharge would be useful in predicting postpartum day seven measures of recovery and postpartum depression screening scores. RESULTS: We consented 558 subjects, 551/558(98%) completed baseline assessments, 400/551(72%) completed the ObsQoR-10 tool, and 344/551(62%) completed an EPDS assessment. Median (1st, 3rd quartile) ObsQoR-10 scores were 78 (63, 90) at discharge and 85 (68,93) on postpartum day seven, (difference of 7 [99% CI 2 to 13], P < 0.001). GHVAS on postpartum day seven identified 204/344 (59%) of subjects with good recovery. An ObsQoR-10 score of > 86 at discharge had a RR of 1.5 [95% CI 1.2 to 1.8], P < 0.001 for good recovery at postpartum day seven, the EPDS identified 20/344 (5.8%) respondents with a score ≥ 13 on postpartum day seven. The area under the curve between the ObsQoR-10 at discharge with an EPDS ≥ 13 was 0.74 (99% CI 0.61 to 0.86, P < 0.001). The RR for an EPDS ≥ 13 on postpartum day seven with an ObsQoR-10 < 77 on the day of discharge was 7.8 (95% CI 1.8 to 33.8; P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: ObsQoR-10 scores at discharge and postpartum day seven demonstrated increased obstetric recovery in the post-discharge period. The observed association between the ObsQoR-10 and the EPDS, suggests that the ObsQoR-10 might facilitate identification of women at increased risk of postpartum anxiety or depression. Identification of high-risk women at discharge may allow early interventions to reduce morbidity secondary to postpartum depression.

The evaluation of the performance of ChatGPT in the management of labor analgesia.

ChatGPT4 is a leading large language model (LLM) chatbot released by OpenAI in 2023. ChatGPT4 can respond to free-text queries, answer questions and make suggestions regarding virtually any topic. ChatGPT4 has successfully answered anesthesia and even obstetric anesthesia knowledge-based questions with reasonable accuracy. However, ChatGPT4 has yet to be challenged in obstetric anesthesia clinical decision-making. STUDY OBJECTIVE: In this study, we evaluated the performance of ChatGPT4 in the management of clinical labor analgesia scenarios compared to expert obstetric anesthesiologists. INTERVENTION: Eight clinical questions with progressively increasing medical complexity were posed to ChatGPT4. MEASUREMENTS: The ChatGPT4 responses were rated by seven expert obstetric anesthesiologists based on safety, accuracy and completeness of each response using a five-point Likert rating scale. MAIN RESULTS: ChatGPT4 was deemed safe in 73% of responses to the presented obstetric anesthesia clinical scenarios (27% of responses were deemed unsafe). None of the ChatGPT4 responses were unanimously deemed to be safe by all seven expert obstetric anesthesiologists. Moreover, ChatGPT4 responses were overall partly accurate (score 4 out of 5) and somewhat incomplete (score 3.5 out of 5). CONCLUSIONS: In summary, approximately one quarter of all responses by ChatGPT4 were deemed unsafe by expert obstetric anesthesiologists. These findings may suggest the need for more fine-tuning and training of LLMs such as ChatGPT4 specifically for clinical decision making in obstetric anesthesia or other specialized medical fields. These LLMs may come to play an important future role in assisting obstetric anesthesiologists in clinical decision making and enhancing overall patient care.

A comparative study of English and Japanese ChatGPT responses to anaesthesia-related medical questions.

Background: The expansion of artificial intelligence (AI) within large language models (LLMs) has the potential to streamline healthcare delivery. Despite the increased use of LLMs, disparities in their performance particularly in different languages, remain underexplored. This study examines the quality of ChatGPT responses in English and Japanese, specifically to questions related to anaesthesiology. Methods: Anaesthesiologists proficient in both languages were recruited as experts in this study. Ten frequently asked questions in anaesthesia were selected and translated for evaluation. Three non-sequential responses from ChatGPT were assessed for content quality (accuracy, comprehensiveness, and safety) and communication quality (understanding, empathy/tone, and ethics) by expert evaluators. Results: Eight anaesthesiologists evaluated English and Japanese LLM responses. The overall quality for all questions combined was higher in English compared with Japanese responses. Content and communication quality were significantly higher in English compared with Japanese LLMs responses (both P<0.001) in all three responses. Comprehensiveness, safety, and understanding were higher scores in English LLM responses. In all three responses, more than half of the evaluators marked overall English responses as better than Japanese responses. Conclusions: English LLM responses to anaesthesia-related frequently asked questions were superior in quality to Japanese responses when assessed by bilingual anaesthesia experts in this report. This study highlights the potential for language-related disparities in healthcare information and the need to improve the quality of AI responses in underrepresented languages. Future studies are needed to explore these disparities in other commonly spoken languages and to compare the performance of different LLMs.

The 2023 Gerard W. Ostheimer Lecture. A Contemporary Narrative Review of Maternal Mortality and Morbidity: Opportunities to Improve Peripartum Outcomes.

The Gerard W. Ostheimer lecture is given annually to members of the Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology. This lecture summarizes new and emerging literature that informs the clinical practice of obstetric anesthesiology. This is a narrative review of 2022 literature pertinent to maternal morbidity and mortality in all income settings globally. Themes associated with worse maternal mortality rate (MMR), challenges health care workers face, public health priority areas, and initiatives to help countries achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal targets for MMR are discussed. MMRs are higher in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) compared to high-income countries (HICs). Cesarean delivery rates are rising most rapidly in LMICs, warranting urgent maternal health care workforce planning efforts in these settings. Globally racial, ethnic, and geographical disparities in maternal mortality continue to be evident in global health care settings. In the United States, the MMR is rising. The evolving changes in abortion legislation in the United States may further negatively impact maternal morbidity and mortality. The need to implement American Society of Anesthesiologists-recommended obstetric anesthesia quality metrics to facilitate benchmarking and to improve patient experience and outcomes is discussed as well as the need for professional society guidance on minimum staffing levels in American labor and delivery units.

Comparison of artificial intelligence large language model chatbots in answering frequently asked questions in anaesthesia.

Background: Patients are increasingly using artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots to seek answers to medical queries. Methods: Ten frequently asked questions in anaesthesia were posed to three AI chatbots: ChatGPT4 (OpenAI), Bard (Google), and Bing Chat (Microsoft). Each chatbot's answers were evaluated in a randomised, blinded order by five residency programme directors from 15 medical institutions in the USA. Three medical content quality categories (accuracy, comprehensiveness, safety) and three communication quality categories (understandability, empathy/respect, and ethics) were scored between 1 and 5 (1 representing worst, 5 representing best). Results: ChatGPT4 and Bard outperformed Bing Chat (median [inter-quartile range] scores: 4 [3-4], 4 [3-4], and 3 [2-4], respectively; P<0.001 with all metrics combined). All AI chatbots performed poorly in accuracy (score of ≥4 by 58%, 48%, and 36% of experts for ChatGPT4, Bard, and Bing Chat, respectively), comprehensiveness (score ≥4 by 42%, 30%, and 12% of experts for ChatGPT4, Bard, and Bing Chat, respectively), and safety (score ≥4 by 50%, 40%, and 28% of experts for ChatGPT4, Bard, and Bing Chat, respectively). Notably, answers from ChatGPT4, Bard, and Bing Chat differed statistically in comprehensiveness (ChatGPT4, 3 [2-4] vs Bing Chat, 2 [2-3], P<0.001; and Bard 3 [2-4] vs Bing Chat, 2 [2-3], P=0.002). All large language model chatbots performed well with no statistical difference for understandability (P=0.24), empathy (P=0.032), and ethics (P=0.465). Conclusions: In answering anaesthesia patient frequently asked questions, the chatbots perform well on communication metrics but are suboptimal for medical content metrics. Overall, ChatGPT4 and Bard were comparable to each other, both outperforming Bing Chat.

Associations between anxiety, sleep, and blood pressure parameters in pregnancy: a prospective pilot cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The potential effect modification of sleep on the relationship between anxiety and elevated blood pressure (BP) in pregnancy is understudied. We evaluated the relationship between anxiety, insomnia, and short sleep duration, as well as any interaction effects between these variables, on BP during pregnancy. METHODS: This was a prospective pilot cohort of pregnant people between 23 to 36 weeks' gestation at a single institution between 2021 and 2022. Standardized questionnaires were used to measure clinical insomnia and anxiety. Objective sleep duration was measured using a wrist-worn actigraphy device. Primary outcomes were systolic (SBP), diastolic (DBP), and mean (MAP) non-invasive BP measurements. Separate sequential multivariable linear regression models fit with generalized estimating equations (GEE) were used to separately assess associations between anxiety (independent variable) and each BP parameter (dependent variables), after adjusting for potential confounders (Model 1). Additional analyses were conducted adding insomnia and the interaction between anxiety and insomnia as independent variables (Model 2), and adding short sleep duration and the interaction between anxiety and short sleep duration as independent variables (Model 3), to evaluate any moderating effects on BP parameters. RESULTS: Among the 60 participants who completed the study, 15 (25%) screened positive for anxiety, 11 (18%) had subjective insomnia, and 34 (59%) had objective short sleep duration. In Model 1, increased anxiety was not associated with increases in any BP parameters. When subjective insomnia was included in Model 2, increased DBP and MAP was significantly associated with anxiety (DBP: ß 6.1, p = 0.01, MAP: ß 6.2 p < 0.01). When short sleep was included in Model 3, all BP parameters were significantly associated with anxiety (SBP: ß 9.6, p = 0.01, DBP: ß 8.1, p < 0.001, and MAP: ß 8.8, p < 0.001). No moderating effects were detected between insomnia and anxiety (p interactions: SBP 0.80, DBP 0.60, MAP 0.32) or between short sleep duration and anxiety (p interactions: SBP 0.12, DBP 0.24, MAP 0.13) on BP. CONCLUSIONS: When including either subjective insomnia or objective short sleep duration, pregnant people with anxiety had 5.1-9.6 mmHg higher SBP, 6.1-8.1 mmHg higher DBP, and 6.2-8.8 mmHg higher MAP than people without anxiety.

Evaluation of Sleep in Pregnant Inpatients Compared With Outpatients.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether antepartum hospitalization was associated with differences in sleep duration or disrupted sleep patterns. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study with enrollment of pregnant people aged 18-55 years with singleton gestations at 16 weeks of gestation or more between 2021 and 2022. Each enrolled antepartum patient was matched by gestational age to outpatients recruited from obstetric clinics at the same institution. Participants responded to the ISI (Insomnia Severity Index) and wore actigraph accelerometer watches for up to 7 days. The primary outcome was total sleep duration per 24 hours. Secondary outcomes included sleep efficiency (time asleep/time in bed), ISI score, clinical insomnia (ISI score higher than 15), short sleep duration (less than 300 minutes/24 hours), wakefulness after sleep onset, number of awakenings, and sleep fragmentation index. Outcomes were evaluated with multivariable generalized estimating equations adjusted for body mass index (BMI), sleep aid use, and insurance type, accounting for gestational age correlations. An interaction term assessed the joint effects of time and inpatient status. RESULTS: Overall 58 participants were included: 18 inpatients and 40 outpatients. Inpatients had significantly lower total sleep duration than outpatients (mean 4.4 hours [SD 1.6 hours] inpatient vs 5.2 hours [SD 1.5 hours] outpatient, adjusted ß=-1.1, 95% CI, -1.8 to -0.3, P =.01). Awakenings (10.1 inpatient vs 13.8, P =.01) and wakefulness after sleep onset (28.3 inpatient vs 35.5 outpatient, P =.03) were lower among inpatients. There were no differences in the other sleep outcomes, and no interaction was detected for time in the study and inpatient status. Inpatients were more likely to use sleep aids (39.9% vs 12.5%, P =.03). CONCLUSION: Hospitalized pregnant patients slept about 1 hour/day less than outpatients. Fewer awakenings and reduced wakefulness after sleep onset among inpatients may reflect increased use of sleep aids in hospitalized patients.

Development and validation of a Spanish version of the Obstetric Quality of Recovery-10 item score (ObsQoR-10-Spanish).

Background: Spanish is the second most spoken language globally with around 475 million native speakers. We aimed to validate a Spanish version of the Obstetric Quality of Recovery-10 item (ObsQoR-10) patient-reported outcome measure. Methods: ObsQoR-10-Spanish was developed using EuroQoL methodology. ObsQoR-10-Spanish was assessed in 100 Spanish-speaking patients undergoing elective Caesarean or vaginal delivery. Patients <38 weeks, undergoing an intrapartum Caesarean delivery, intrauterine death, or maternal admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) were excluded. Validity was assessed by evaluating (i) convergent validity-correlation with 24-h EuroQoL and global health visual analogue scale (GHVAS) scores (0-100); (ii) discriminant validity-difference in ObsQoR-10-Spanish score for patients with GHVAS scores >70 vs <70; (iii) hypothesis testing-correlation of ObsQoR score with maternal and neonatal factors; and (iv) cross-cultural validity assessed using differential item functioning analysis. Reliability was assessed by evaluating: (i) internal consistency; (ii) split-half reliability and (iii) test-retest reliability; and (iv) floor and ceiling effects. Results: One hundred patients were approached, recruited, and completed surveys. Validity: (i) convergent validity: the ObsQoR 24-h score correlated moderately with the 24-h EuroQoL (r=-0.632) and GHVAS scores (r=0.590); (ii) discriminant validity: the ObsQoR-10-Spanish 24-h scores were higher in women who delivered vaginally compared to via Caesarean delivery, (mean [standard deviation] scores were 89 [9] vs 81 [12]; P<0.001). The 24-h ObsQoR-Spanish scores were lower in patients experiencing a poor vs a good recovery (mean [standard deviation] scores were 76 [12.3] vs 87.1 [10.6]; P=0.001); (iii) hypothesis testing: the ObsQoR-10 score correlated negatively with age (r=-0.207) and positively with 5-min (r=0.204) and 10-min (r=0.243) Apgar scores. Remaining correlations were not significant; and (iv) differential item functioning analysis suggested no potential bias among the 10 items. Reliability: (i) internal consistency was good (Cronbach alpha=0.763); (ii) split-half reliability was good (Spearman-Brown prophesy reliability estimate of 0.866); (iii) test-retest reliability was excellent with an intra-class correlation coefficient of 0.90; and (iv) floor and ceiling effects: six patients scored a maximum total ObsQoR-10 score. Conclusions: The ObsQoR-10-Spanish patient-reported outcome measure is valid, reliable, and clinically feasible, and should be considered for use in Spanish-speaking women to assess quality of inpatient postpartum recovery.