Factors Associated With the Microbiome in Moderate-Late Preterm Babies: A Cohort Study From the DIAMOND Randomized Controlled Trial.

The gut microbiota of preterm infants is affected by perinatal factors and, in turn, may impact upon infant health. In this study, we collected fecal samples at Day-10 (D10) and 4-months corrected-age (4M) from 227 moderate-late preterm (MLPT) babies enrolled in a randomized controlled trial of nutritional management. A total of 320 samples underwent 16S amplicon sequencing, and shotgun metagenomic sequencing was performed on 94 samples from the 4M time point. The microbiome of babies whose families lived in lower socioeconomic status (SES) areas exhibited a significantly higher microbial alpha diversity at D10 (Wilcoxon test, p = 0.021), greater abundance of Bifidobacterium (linear model, q = 0.020) at D10 and Megasphaera (q = 0.031) at 4M. Hospital of birth explained 5.2% of the observed variance in 4M samples (PERMANOVA, p = 0.038), with Staphylococcus aureus more abundant in fecal samples from babies born in Middlemore hospital (linear model, q = 0.016). Maternal antibiotic (Wilcoxon test, p = 0.013) and probiotic (p = 0.04) usage within the four-week period before sample collection was associated with a reduction in the alpha diversity of D10 samples. Infant probiotic intake explained 2.1% (PERMANOVA, p = 0.021) of the variance in the D10 microbial profile with increased Lactobacillus (linear model, q = 1.1 × 10-10) levels. At 4M, the microbiome of infants who were breastmilk fed had reduced alpha diversity when compared to non-breastmilk fed infants (Wilcoxon test, p < 0.05). Although causality cannot be inferred within our study, we conclude that in MLPT babies, maternal socioeconomic factors, as well as the perinatal medical environment and nutrition impact on the development of the newborn microbiome.

introduce nationwide pulse oximetry screening for the detection of critical congenital heart disease and other hypoxaemic conditions in the newborn.

The mortality risk for infants with critical congenital heart disease (CCHD) unrecognised at the time of birth is high. Pulse oximetry has been utilised as a screening tool for the detection of these anomalies in the newborn as the majority will have a degree of hypoxaemia. This screening strategy has a moderate sensitivity and excellent specificity for the detection of CCHD, and a low false-positive rate. Respiratory and infective diseases are responsible for a large number of positive test results. The early recognition of these diseases can also improve health outcomes. Different approaches have been taken to introduce screening, ranging from hospital-led initiatives to mandatory state-wide policies. A study conducted in New Zealand demonstrated that sector-led screening initiatives are unlikely to result in equitable outcomes. In this midwifery-led maternity setting a nationwide pulse oximetry screening programme with adequate human and material resources should be introduced.

Feasibility study assessing equitable delivery of newborn pulse oximetry screening in New Zealand's midwifery-led maternity setting.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to conduct New Zealand-specific research to inform the design of a pulse oximetry screening strategy that ensures equity of access for the New Zealand maternity population. Equity is an important consideration as the test has the potential to benefit some populations and socioeconomic groups more than others. SETTING: New Zealand has an ethnically diverse population and a midwifery-led maternity service. One quaternary hospital and urban primary birthing unit (Region A), two regional hospitals (Region B) and three regional primary birthing units (Region C) from three Health Boards in New Zealand's North Island participated in a feasibility study of pulse oximetry screening. Home births in these regions were also included. PARTICIPANTS: There were 27 172 infants that satisfied the inclusion criteria; 16 644 (61%) were screened. The following data were collected for all well newborn infants with a gestation age ≥35 weeks: date of birth, ethnicity, type of maternity care provider, deprivation index and screening status (yes/no). The study was conducted over a 2-year period from May 2016 to April 2018. RESULTS: Screening rates improved over time. Infants born in Region B (adjusted OR=0.75; 95% CI 0.67 to 0.83) and C (adjusted OR=0.29; 95% CI 0.27 to 0.32) were less likely to receive screening compared with those born in Region A. There were significant associations between screening rates and deprivation, ethnicity and maternity care provider. Lack of human and material resources prohibited universal access to screening. CONCLUSION: A pulse oximetry screening programme that is sector-led is likely to perpetuate inequity. Screening programmes need to be designed so that resources are distributed in the way most likely to optimise health outcomes for infants born with cardiac anomalies. ETHICS APPROVAL: This study was approved by the Health and Disability Ethics Committees of New Zealand (15/NTA/168).

Randomised clinical trials in perinatal health care: a cost-effective investment.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the health and economic impacts of implementing efficacious treatment interventions with maintaining standard practice in maternal and perinatal health care. DESIGN AND SETTING: We identified randomised clinical trials (RCTs) in the Perinatal Society of Australia and New Zealand trials database that commenced recruitment during 2008 and had completed recruitment by 2015. Data from clinical trial registries and publications were collated to calculate the potential cost savings achievable by implementing efficacious treatment interventions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Projected net cost savings over 5 years. RESULTS: Twenty-three eligible RCTs covering a range of behavioural and clinical interventions were identified, of which six reported interventions superior to standard practice (four trials) or placebo (two). The outcomes (but not the costs) of 17 trials were excluded from analysis (no difference between intervention and comparator groups in seven trials, recruitment problems in six, findings not yet published in four). The total funding amount for the 23 trials was $20.3 million; the potential cost savings over 5 years if the findings of the six trials reporting superior interventions were implemented was estimated to be $26.3 million if 10% of the eligible populations received the effective interventions, and $262.8 million with 100% implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Our retrospective analysis highlights the value of research in perinatal care and the importance of implementing positive findings for realising its value. Future trials in maternal and perinatal health care may provide significant returns on investment by informing clinical practice, improving patient outcomes and reducing health care costs.