Resting energy expenditure in infants with congenital diaphragmatic hernia without respiratory support at time of neonatal hospital discharge.

BACKGROUND: Infants with congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) are at risk for growth failure because of inadequate caloric intake and high catabolic stress. There is limited data on resting energy expenditure (REE) in infants with CDH. AIMS: To assess REE via indirect calorimetry (IC) in term infants with CDH who are no longer on respiratory support and nearing hospital discharge with advancing post-conceptional age and to assess measured-to-predicted REE using predictive equations. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of term infants with CDH who were no longer on respiratory support and nearing hospital discharge was conducted to assess REE via IC and caloric intake. Baseline characteristics and hospital course data were collected. Three day average caloric intake around time of IC testing was calculated. Change in REE with advancing post-conceptional age and advancing post-natal age was assessed. The average measured-to-predicted REE was calculated for the cohort using predictive equations [22]. RESULTS: Eighteen infants with CDH underwent IC. REE in infants with CDH increased with advancing postconceptional age (r2 = 0.3, p < 0.02). The mean REE for the entire group was 53.2 +/- 10.9 kcal/kg/day while the mean caloric intake was 101.2 +/- 17.4 kcal/kg/day. The mean measured-to-predicted ratio for the cohort was in the normal metabolic range (1.10 +/- 0.17) with 50% of infants considered hypermetabolic and 11% of infants considered hypo-metabolic. CONCLUSIONS: Infant survivors of CDH repair who are without respiratory support at time of neonatal hospital discharge have REE, as measured by indirect calorimetry, that increases with advancing post-conceptional age and that is within the normal metabolic range when compared to predictive equations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

A randomized controlled trial of screening and brief interventions for substance misuse in reproductive health.

BACKGROUND: Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment may reduce substance misuse but has received minimal study among women who are treated in reproductive health settings. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether "screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment" that is delivered either electronically or by clinician are more effective than enhanced usual care in decreasing days of primary substance use. STUDY DESIGN: Women from 2 reproductive centers who smoked cigarettes or misused alcohol, illicit drugs, or prescription medication were allocated randomly to "screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment" delivered electronically or by clinician or to enhanced usual care. Assessments were completed at baseline and at 1-, 3-, and 6-months after a baseline has been established. Coprimary outcomes were days/months of primary substance use and postintervention treatment use. A sample size of 660 women was planned; randomization was stratified by primary substance use and pregnancy status. "Screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment" groups were compared with enhanced usual care groups with the use of generalized estimation equations, and effect sizes were calculated with the use of Cohen's d. RESULTS: Between September 2011 and January 2015, women were assigned randomly to a group: 143 women (16.8% pregnant) in the electronic-delivered "screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment" group, 145 women (18.6% pregnant) in the clinician-delivered "screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment" group, and 151 women (19.2% pregnant) in the enhanced usual care group; the retention was >84%. Based on the generalized estimating equations model, predicted mean days per month of use at baseline for primary substance were 23.9 days (95% confidence interval, 22.4-25.5) for the electronic-delivered group, 22.8 days (95% confidence interval, 21.4-24.3) for the clinician-delivered group, and 23.5 days (95% confidence interval, 22.2, 24.9) for enhanced usual care, which respectively declined to 20.5 days (95% confidence interval, 19.0-22.2), 19.8 days (95% confidence interval,18.5-21.3), and 21.9 days (95% confidence interval, 20.7-23.1) at 1 month; 16.9 days (95% confidence interval, 15.0-19.0), 16.6 days (95% confidence interval, 14.8-18.6), and 19.5 days (95% confidence interval, 18.1-21.1) at 3 months; and 16.3 days (95% confidence interval, 14.3-18.7), 16.3 days (95% confidence interval, 14.4-18.5), and 17.9 days (95% confidence interval, 16.1-19.9) at 6 months. Estimated declines were greater in the electronic-delivered group (ß [standard error]=-0.090[0.034]; P=.008; Cohen's d, 0.19 at 1 month, 0.30 at 3 months, and 0.17 at 6 months) and the clinician-delivered group (ß [standard error]=-0.078[0.037]; P=.038; Cohen's d, 0.17 at 1 month, 0.22 at 3 months, and 0.06 at 6 months) compared with enhanced usual care. Treatment use did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: "Screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment" significantly decreased days of primary substance use among women in reproductive healthcare centers; neither resulted in more treatment use than enhanced usual care.

Prenatal hazardous substance use and adverse birth outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Assess the relative effects of a variety of illicit and licit drugs on risk for adverse birth outcomes. METHODS: We used data from two large prospective investigations, and a novel analytic method, recursive partitioning class analysis to identify risk factors associated with preterm birth and delivering a small for gestational age infant. RESULTS: Compared to cocaine and opiate non-users, cocaine users were 3.53 times as likely (95% CI: 1.65-7.56; p = 0.001) and opiate users 2.86 times as likely (95% CI: 1.11-7.36; p = 0.03) to deliver preterm. The odds of delivering a small for gestational age infant for women who smoked more than two cigarettes daily was 3.74, (95% CI: 2.47-5.65; p<0.0001) compared to women who smoked two or less cigarettes daily and had one previous child. Similarly, less educated, nulliparous women who smoked two or fewer cigarettes daily were 4.12 times as likely (95% CI: 2.04-8.34; p < 0.0001) to have a small for gestational age infant. CONCLUSIONS: Among our covariates, prenatal cocaine and opiate use are the predominant risk factors for preterm birth; while tobacco use was the primary risk factor predicting small for gestational age at delivery. Multi-substance use did not substantially increase risk of adverse birth outcomes over these risk factors.

Screening for prenatal substance use: development of the Substance Use Risk Profile-Pregnancy scale.

OBJECTIVE: To report on the development of a questionnaire to screen for hazardous substance use in pregnant women and to compare the performance of the questionnaire with other drug and alcohol measures. METHODS: Pregnant women were administered a modified TWEAK (Tolerance, Worried, Eye-openers, Amnesia, K[C] Cut Down) questionnaire, the 4Ps Plus questionnaire, items from the Addiction Severity Index, and two questions about domestic violence (N=2,684). The sample was divided into "training" (n=1,610) and "validation" (n=1,074) subsamples. We applied recursive partitioning class analysis to the responses from individuals in the training subsample that resulted in a three-item Substance Use Risk Profile-Pregnancy scale. We examined sensitivity, specificity, and the fit of logistic regression models in the validation subsample to compare the performance of the Substance Use Risk Profile-Pregnancy scale with the modified TWEAK and various scoring algorithms of the 4Ps. RESULTS: The Substance Use Risk Profile-Pregnancy scale is comprised of three informative questions that can be scored for high- or low-risk populations. The Substance Use Risk Profile-Pregnancy scale algorithm for low-risk populations was mostly highly predictive of substance use in the validation subsample (Akaike's Information Criterion=579.75, Nagelkerke R=0.27) with high sensitivity (91%) and adequate specificity (67%). The high-risk algorithm had lower sensitivity (57%) but higher specificity (88%). CONCLUSION: The Substance Use Risk Profile-Pregnancy scale is simple and flexible with good sensitivity and specificity. The Substance Use Risk Profile-Pregnancy scale can potentially detect a range of substances that may be abused. Clinicians need to further assess women with a positive screen to identify those who require treatment for alcohol or illicit substance use in pregnancy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Depression screening of perinatal women: an evaluation of the healthy start depression initiative.

OBJECTIVE: To address problems with low rates of detection and treatment of depression of pregnant and postpartum women, many advocate depression screening in obstetrical settings. This study evaluated the Healthy Start depression initiative to assess whether it resulted in diminished rates of depressive symptoms and increased rates of detection, referral, and treatment among pregnant and postpartum women. METHODS: Three cohorts were used to examine the program impact: a pre-Healthy Start depression initiative cohort, a post-Healthy Start depression initiative cohort that was enrolled in New Haven Healthy Start, and a post-Healthy Start depression initiative cohort not enrolled in the New Haven program. Participants included 1,336 pregnant and postpartum women receiving obstetrical care at publicly funded health care clinics. Measures included the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders Brief Patient Health Questionnaire; the PTSD Symptom Scale; a five-item modification of the Conflict Tactics Scale; and questions regarding alcohol, illicit substances, and general medical and obstetrical history. RESULTS: The Healthy Start depression initiative changed neither levels of depressive symptoms nor use of depression treatment in unselected populations. The initiative may have decreased the rate of referral for depression in the cohort under study. CONCLUSIONS: Universal screening and support for treatment referral by paraprofessionals did not reduce the overall rates of depressive symptoms of perinatal women who received care at publicly funded obstetrical clinics. Future work on depression screening should consider strategies to engage women who are more severely affected by a depressive disorder in behavioral health treatment.

Screening for and detection of depression, panic disorder, and PTSD in public-sector obstetric clinics.

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed rates of detection and treatment of minor and major depressive disorder, panic disorder, and posttraumatic stress disorder among pregnant women receiving prenatal care at public-sector obstetric clinics. METHODS: Interviewers systematically screened 387 women attending prenatal visits. The screening process was initiated before each woman's examination. After the visit, patients were asked whether their clinician recognized a mood or anxiety disorder. Medical records were reviewed for documentation of psychiatric illness and treatment. RESULTS: Only 26 percent of patients who screened positive for a psychiatric illness were recognized as having a mood or anxiety disorder by their health care provider. Moreover, clinicians detected disorders among only 12 percent of patients who showed evidence of suicidal ideation. Women with panic disorder or a lifetime history of domestic violence were more likely to be identified as having a psychiatric illness by a health care provider at some point before or during pregnancy. All women who screened positive for panic disorder had received or were currently receiving mental health treatment outside the prenatal visit, whereas 26 percent of women who screened positive for major or minor depression had received or were currently receiving treatment outside the prenatal visit. CONCLUSIONS: Detection rates for depressive disorders in obstetric settings are lower than those for panic disorder and lower than those reported in other primary care settings. Consequently, a large proportion of pregnant women continue to suffer silently with depression throughout their pregnancy. Given that depressive disorders among perinatal women are highly prevalent and may have profound impact on infants and children, more work is needed to enhance detection and referral.