Factors that shape pregnant women's perceptions regarding the safety of cannabis use during pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Cannabis use among pregnant women has increased. We surveyed pregnant women in rural Pennsylvania to examine cannabis use and opinions regarding its safety during pregnancy. We examined associations between challenges of pregnancy (e.g., exhaustion, pain, nausea) and cannabis use. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was administered to a convenience sample of English-speaking pregnant women receiving prenatal care at Geisinger, May-June 2019. Principal component analysis (PCA) was used to construct three scores (overwhelmed/exhausted, happy/optimistic, and health worries) based on 10 questions regarding common experiences during pregnancy (e.g., nausea/vomiting, pain, exhaustion, mood). A score based on four questions regarding cannabis safety during pregnancy was also constructed. RESULTS: From a maximum of 300 surveys distributed, 284 were completed (95%). Most participants were white (87%), married (49%) or living with a partner (38%), and had private health insurance (62%). Most women indicated it was unsafe to use alcohol and tobacco products during pregnancy (> 90%), but that proportion dropped to 82% and 63% regarding recreational cannabis and medical cannabis, respectively. Only women with prior cannabis use (23% of sample) continued to do so during pregnancy: 57% of women reporting daily cannabis use prior to pregnancy continued to use cannabis during pregnancy with 33% reporting daily use. Two thirds of users during pregnancy indicated they were self-medicating for: nausea (90%), anxiety (70%), insomnia (30%), and pain management (30%). Many (56%) of the women who used cannabis during pregnancy believed it is safe. Younger women and women who were overwhelmed/exhausted or less happy/optimistic were more likely to believe cannabis use is safe. Women valued healthcare provider advice more than advice from family and friends. Study strengths include a high response rate. Weaknesses include self-report and that is was a convenience sample; however, the demographics of the sample were similar to past studies. CONCLUSION: Women with a history of cannabis use, especially daily use, are at risk of continuing during pregnancy and should receive counseling. Younger women and women with greater stressors during pregnancy also are at greater risk. Screening for prior use and for stressors may identify patients that would benefit from enhanced counseling.

The effect of the MFM obesity protocol on cesarean delivery rates.

BACKGROUND: Obesity in pregnancy has an impact on both the mother and the fetus. To date, no universal protocol has been established to guide the management of pregnancy in obese woman. In April 2011, the Geisinger Maternal-Fetal Medicine Department implemented an obesity protocol in which women meeting the following criteria were delivered by their estimated due dates: (1) class III obese or (2) class II obese with additional diagnoses of a large-for-gestational-age fetus or pregnancy complicated by gestational diabetes or (3) class I obese with large-for-gestational-age and gestational diabetes. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the impact of this protocol on the rate of cesarean deliveries in obese women. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 5000 randomly selected women who delivered at Geisinger between January 2009 and September 2013, excluding those who delivered in 2011. The data were stratified into obese and nonobese and divided into before protocol and after protocol. Comparison across all groups was accomplished using Wilcoxon rank sum and Pearson's χ(2) tests. Potential confounders were controlled for using logistic regression. RESULTS: The cesarean delivery rate in the obese/after protocol group was 10.8% lower than in the obese/before protocol group (42.4% vs 31.6%, respectively; P < .0001). In addition, when controlling for age, race, smoking status, preeclampsia, gestational diabetes, and intrauterine growth restriction, obese women were 37% less likely to have a cesarean delivery after the protocol than they were before (odds ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.52, 0.76, P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Implementation of a maternal-fetal medicine obesity protocol did not increase the rate of cesarean deliveries in obese women. On the contrary, obese women were less likely to have a cesarean delivery after implementation of the protocol.

Timing of intravenous prophylactic antibiotics for preventing postpartum infectious morbidity in women undergoing cesarean delivery.

BACKGROUND: Given the continued rise in cesarean birth rate and the increased risk of surgical site infections after cesarean birth compared with vaginal birth, effective interventions must be established for prevention of surgical site infections. Prophylactic intravenous (IV) antibiotic administration 60 minutes prior to skin incision is recommended for abdominal gynecologic surgery; however, administration of prophylactic antibiotics has traditionally been withheld until after neonatal umbilical cord clamping during cesarean delivery due to the concern for potential transfer of antibiotics to the neonate. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of cesarean antibiotic prophylaxis administered preoperatively versus after neonatal cord clamp on postoperative infectious complications for both the mother and the neonate. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (1 March 2014) and reference lists of retrieved papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing maternal and neonatal outcomes following prophylactic antibiotics administered prior to skin incision versus after neonatal cord clamping during cesarean delivery. Cluster-RCTs were eligible for inclusion but none were identified. Quasi-RCT and trials using a cross-over design were not eligible for inclusion in this review. Studies published in abstract form only were eligible for inclusion if sufficient information was available in the report. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias, abstracted data and checked entries for accuracy. We assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 10 studies (12 trial reports) from which 5041 women contributed data for the primary outcome. The overall risk of bias was low.When comparing prophylactic intravenous (IV) antibiotic administration in women undergoing cesarean delivery, there was a reduction in composite maternal infectious morbidity (risk ratio (RR) 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45 to 0.72, high quality evidence), which was specifically due to the reduction in endometritis (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.79, high quality evidence) and wound infection (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.81, high quality evidence) in those that received antibiotics preoperatively as compared to those who received antibiotics after neonatal cord clamping. There were no clear differences in neonatal sepsis (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.13, moderate quality evidence).There were no clear differences for other maternal outcomes such as urinary tract infection (UTI), cystitis and pyelonephritis (moderate quality evidence), respiratory infection (low quality evidence), or any neonatal outcomes. Maternal side effects were not reported in the included studies.The quality of the evidence using GRADE was high for composite morbidity, endomyometritis, wound infection and neonatal intensive care unit admission, moderate for UTI/cystitis/pyelonephritis and neonatal sepsis, and low for maternal respiratory infection. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on high quality evidence from studies whose overall risk of bias is low, intravenous prophylactic antibiotics for cesarean administered preoperatively significantly decreases the incidence of composite maternal postpartum infectious morbidity as compared with administration after cord clamp. There were no clear differences in adverse neonatal outcomes reported. Women undergoing cesarean delivery should receive antibiotic prophylaxis preoperatively to reduce maternal infectious morbidities. Further research may be needed to elucidate short- and long-term adverse effects for neonates.

The utility of screening for historical risk factors for preterm birth in women with known second trimester cervical length.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate for the presence of risk factors (RFs) for preterm birth (PTB) in women without prior PTB having second trimester cervical length (CL) screening, and to estimate the utility of RF screening. METHODS: "Low-risk" singletons were prospectively screened with midtrimester transvaginal ultrasound CL. Prior PTB, intrauterine fetal demise and lethal anomalies were excluded. Women were analyzed based on second trimester CL (<25 mm versus ≥25 mm) and the presence of RFs for PTB. A p-value of < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: A total of 639 women were screened; 8% had CL <25 mm. Ninety-eight percent of women with CL <25 mm and 95% of women with CL ≥25 mm had RFs for PTB. Five percent of women with a CL ≥25 mm delivered preterm as compared to 18% with CL <25 mm (p < 0.01). Treatment of cervical dysplasia, drug use during the pregnancy and unmarried status were significantly more common in women with CL <25 mm than CL ≥25 mm. When data were analyzed by CL, the presence of additional RFs did not add to the prediction of PTB <37 weeks. DISCUSSION: Over 95% of singleton gestations without prior PTB have ≥1 other RF for PTB. In women without prior PTB, assessment of other PTB RFs does not add to prediction of PTB provided by CL alone.

Cesarean skin closure preferences: a survey of obstetricians.

OBJECTIVE: In light of the limited evidence directing cesarean skin closure techniques, we evaluated the factors guiding obstetricians' preferences for closure method. METHODS: From 07/11 to 12/11, an online survey was sent to obstetricians in ACOG Regions I and II. Obstetricians were asked to indicate their cesarean skin closure preferences when considering various factors and to rank the importance of these factors in their decision. Practice type, experience and usual method of closure were also assessed. RESULTS: Responses were received from 470 of 1400 surveyed (34% response rate), of which 422 were analyzed. Similar proportions reported primarily using sutures (39%) or staples (48%); 13% use both methods equally. More obstetricians at community hospitals primarily use sutures (48% versus 39%, p < 0.001), while more at university hospitals primarily use staples (57% versus 30%, p < 0.001). Listed in decreasing order of importance, sutures were preferred when considering patient satisfaction, keloid susceptibility, cosmesis, first Pfannenstiel incisions or cost. Staples were preferred when considering wound infections, obese patients, chorioamnionitis, HIV/AIDS or busy labor floors (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The limited evidence to guide cesarean skin closure forces obstetricians to rely on personal experience. Our survey indicates that despite this limitation, obstetricians have specific preferences for cesarean skin closure method.

Techniques and materials for skin closure in caesarean section.

BACKGROUND: Caesarean section is a common operation with no agreed upon standard regarding certain operative techniques or materials to use. With regard to skin closure, the skin incision can be re-approximated by a subcuticular suture immediately below the skin layer, by an interrupted suture, or by staples. A great variety of materials and techniques are used for skin closure after caesarean section and there is a need to identify which provide the best outcomes for women. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of skin closure techniques and materials on maternal and operative outcomes after caesarean section. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (10 January 2012). SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomized trials comparing different skin closure materials in caesareans were selected. Two review authors independently abstracted the data. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We identified 19 trials and included 11, but only eight trials contributed data. Three trials were not randomized controlled trials; two were ongoing; one study was terminated and the results were not available for review; one is awaiting classification; and one did not compare skin closure materials, but rather suture to suture and drain placement. MAIN RESULTS: The two methods of skin closure for caesarean that have been most often compared are non-absorbable staples and absorbable subcutaneous sutures. Compared with absorbable subcutaneous sutures, non-absorbable staples are associated with similar incidences of wound infection. Other important secondary outcomes, such as wound complications, were also similar between the groups in women with Pfannenstiel incisions. However, it is important to note, that for both of these outcomes (wound infection and wound complication), staples may have a differential effect depending on the type of skin incision, i.e., Pfannenstiel or vertical. Compared with absorbable subcutaneous sutures, non-absorbable staples are associated with an increased risk of skin separation, and therefore, reclosure. However, skin separation was variably defined across trials, and most staples were removed before four days postpartum. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently no conclusive evidence about how the skin should be closed after caesarean section. Staples are associated with similar outcomes in terms of wound infection, pain and cosmesis compared with sutures, and these two are the most commonly studied methods for skin closure after caesarean section. If staples are removed on day three, there is an increased incidence of skin separation and the need for reclosure compared with absorbable sutures.

Techniques and materials for skin closure in caesarean section.

BACKGROUND: Caesarean section is a common operation with no agreed upon standard regarding certain operative techniques or materials to use. With regard to skin closure, the skin incision can be re-approximated by a subcuticular suture immediately below the skin layer, by an interrupted suture, or by staples. A great variety of materials and techniques are used for skin closure after caesarean section and there is a need to identify which provide the best outcomes for women. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of skin closure techniques and materials on maternal and operative outcomes after caesarean section. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (10 January 2012). SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomized trials comparing different skin closure materials in caesareans were selected. Two review authors independently extracted the data. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We identified 18 trials and included 10, but only eight trials contributed data. Three trials were not randomized controlled trials; three were ongoing; and one did not compare skin closure materials, but rather suture to suture and drain placement. MAIN RESULTS: The two methods of skin closure for caesarean that have been most often compared are non-absorbable staples and absorbable subcutaneous sutures. Compared with absorbable subcutaneous sutures, non-absorbable staples are associated with similar incidences of wound infection. Other important secondary outcomes, such as wound complications, were also similar between the groups in women with Pfannenstiel incisions. However, it is important to note, that for both of these outcomes (wound infection and wound complication), staples may have a differential effect depending on the type of skin incision, i.e., Pfannenstiel or vertical. Compared with absorbable subcutaneous sutures, non-absorbable staples are associated with an increased risk of skin separation, and therefore, reclosure. However, skin separation was variably defined across trials, and most staples were removed before four days postpartum. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently no conclusive evidence about how the skin should be closed after caesarean section. Staples are associated with similar outcomes in terms of wound infection, pain and cosmesis compared with sutures, and these two are the most commonly studied methods for skin closure after caesarean section. If staples are removed on day three, there is an increased incidence of skin separation and the need for reclosure compared with absorbable sutures.

Clostridium perfringens Sepsis and Fetal Demise after Genetic Amniocentesis.

Clostridium perfringens is a rare cause of intrauterine infection. There have been five case reports concerning infection associated with invasive procedures. We report a woman who underwent a genetic amniocentesis due to her history of chronic granulomatous disease. She presented to the hospital ∼38 hours after the amniocentesis complaining of fever and chills. Due to acute decompensation, she underwent an emergent dilatation and evacuation. During her stay, blood cultures came back positive for C. perfringens. Gradual improvement with intensive monitoring led to hospital discharge 4 days after the procedure. Uterine infection due to C. perfringens leading to maternal sepsis is associated with a high morbidity and mortality rate. Our patient was able to survive without a hysterectomy due to the rapid administration of antibiotics and surgical intervention while being evaluated.