Measuring severe neonatal morbidity using hospital discharge data in France.

BACKGROUND: Measuring infant health at birth is key for surveillance and research in obstetrics and neonatology, but there is no international consensus on morbidity indicators. The Neonatal Adverse Outcome Indicator (NAOI) is a composite indicator, developed in Australia, which measures the burden of severe neonatal morbidity using hospital discharge data. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the applicability of the NAOI in France for surveillance and research. METHODS: We constituted a cohort of live births ≥24 weeks' gestational age in Metropolitan France from 2014 to 2015 using hospital discharge, insurance claims and cause of death data. Outlier hospitals were identified using funnel plots of standardised morbidity ratios (SMR), and their coding patterns were assessed. We compared the NAOI and its component codes with published Australian and English data and estimated unadjusted and adjusted risk ratios for known risk factors for neonatal morbidity. RESULTS: We included 1,459,123 births (511 hospitals). Twenty-eight hospitals had SMR above funnel plot control limits. Newborns with NAOI morbidities in these hospitals had lower mortality and shorter stays than in other hospitals. Amongst within-limit hospitals, NAOI prevalence was 4.8%, comparable to Australia (4.6%) and England (5.4%). Most individual components had a similar prevalence, with the exception of respiratory support, intravenous fluid procedures and infection. NAOI was lowest at 39 weeks (2.2%) with higher risks for maternal age ≥40 (relative risk [RR] 1.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.42, 1.51), state medical insurance (RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.52, 1.68), male sex (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.19, 1.23) and birthweight <3rd percentile (RR 4.60, 95% CI 4.51, 4.69). CONCLUSIONS: The NAOI provides valuable information on population prevalence of severe neonatal morbidity and its risk factors. Whilst the prevalence was similar in high-income countries with comparable neonatal mortality levels, ensuring valid comparisons between countries and hospitals will require further work to harmonize coding procedures, especially for infection and respiratory morbidity.

Impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and first lockdown on pregnancy monitoring in France: the COVIMATER cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: In the context of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, consultations and pregnancy monitoring examinations had to be reorganised urgently. In addition, women themselves may have postponed or cancelled their medical monitoring for organisational reasons, for fear of contracting the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) or for other reasons of their own. Delayed care can have deleterious consequences for both the mother and the child. Our objective was therefore to study the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the first lockdown in France on voluntary changes by pregnant women in the medical monitoring of their pregnancy and the associated factors. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in July 2020 using a web-questionnaire completed by 500 adult (> 18 years old) pregnant women during the first French lockdown (March-May 2020). A robust variance Poisson regression model was used to estimate adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs). RESULTS: Almost one women of five (23.4%) reported having voluntarily postponed or foregone at least one consultation or pregnancy check-up during the lockdown. Women who were professionally inactive (aPR = 1.98, CI95%[1.24-3.16]), who had experienced serious disputes or violence during the lockdown (1.47, [1.00-2.16]), who felt they received little or no support (1.71, [1.07-2.71]), and those who changed health professionals during the lockdown (1.57, [1.04-2.36]) were all more likely to have voluntarily changed their pregnancy monitoring. Higher level of worry about the pandemic was associated with a lower probability of voluntarily changing pregnancy monitoring (0.66, [0.46-0.96]). CONCLUSIONS: Our results can guide prevention and support policies for pregnant women in the current and future pandemics.

Composite neonatal morbidity indicators using hospital discharge data: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Neonatal morbidity is associated with lifelong impairments, but the absence of a consensual definition and the need for large data sets limit research. OBJECTIVES: To inform initiatives to define standard outcomes for research, we reviewed composite neonatal morbidity indicators derived from routine hospital discharge data. DATA SOURCES: PubMed (updated on October 12, 2018). The search algorithm was based on three components: "morbidity," "neonatal," and "hospital discharge data." STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Studies investigating neonatal morbidity using a composite indicator based on hospital discharge data were included. Indicators defined for specific conditions (eg congenital anomalies, maternal addictions) were excluded. The target population, objectives, component morbidities, diagnosis and procedure codes, validation methods, and prevalence of morbidity were extracted. SYNTHESIS: For each study, we assessed construct validity by describing the methods used to select the indicator components and evaluated whether the authors assessed internal and external validity. We also calculated confidence intervals for the prevalence of the morbidity composite. RESULTS: Seventeen studies fulfilled inclusion criteria. Indicators targeted all (n = 4), low-/moderate-risk (n = 9), and very preterm (VPT, n = 4) infants. Components were similar for VPT infants, but domains and diagnosis codes within domains varied widely for all and low-/moderate-risk infants. Component selection was described for 8/17 indicators and some form of validation reported for 12/17. Neonatal morbidity prevalence ranged from 4.6% to 9.0% of all infants, 0.4% to 8.0% of low-/moderate-risk infants, and 17.8% to 61.0% of VPT infants. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple neonatal morbidity indicators based on hospital discharge data have been used for research, but their heterogeneity limits comparisons between studies. Standard neonatal outcome measures are needed for benchmarking and synthesis of research results.

Pregnant women's unmet need to communicate with a health professional during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic lockdown in France: The Covimater cross-sectional study.

During the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic lockdown, communication between pregnant women and health professionals may have become complicated due to restrictions on movement and saturated health services. This could have impacts on pregnancy monitoring and women's wellbeing. We aimed to i) describe the unmet need of pregnant women living in France to communicate with health professionals about the pandemic and their pregnancy during the lockdown, ii) assess the socio-demographic, medical and contextual factors associated with this unmet need. The Covimater cross-sectional study, conducted in July 2020, includes data on 500 adult women's experiences of pregnancy during the first lockdown period in France (i.e., from March to May 2020). The women, all residents in metropolitan France, answered a web-based questionnaire about their conversations with health professionals during the lockdown, as well as their social and medical characteristics. A robust variance Poisson regression model was used to estimate crude or adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) for their unmet need to communicate with health professionals about the pandemic and their pregnancy. Forty-one percent of participants reported an unmet need to communicate with a health professional during the lockdown, mainly about the risk of transmitting SARS-CoV-2 to their baby and the consequences for the latter. Factors associated were: i) being professionally inactive (aPR = 1.58,CI95%[(1.14-2.21]), ii) having an educational level below secondary school diploma (1.38,[1.05,-1.81]), iii) having experienced serious arguments/violence (2.12,[1.28-3.52]), iv) being very worried about the pandemic (1.41,[1.11-1.78]), v) being primiparous (1.36,[1.06-1.74]) and vi) having had pregnancy consultations postponed/cancelled by health professionals during the lockdown (1.35,[1.06-1.73]). These results can be used to develop targeted strategies that ensure pregnant women are able to i) communicate with health professionals about the potential impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on their pregnancy, and ii) access up-to-date and reliable information on the consequences of SARS-CoV-2 for themselves and their child.