Routine Prenatal Care.

The one-size-fits-all model of prenatal care has remained largely unchanged since 1930. New models of prenatal care delivery can improve its efficacy, equity, and experience through tailoring prenatal care to meet pregnant people's medical and social needs. Key aspects of recently developed prenatal care models include visit schedules based on needed services, telemedicine, home measurement of routine pregnancy parameters, and interventions that address social and structural drivers of health. Several barriers that affect the individual, provider, health system, and policy levels must be addressed to facilitate implementation of new prenatal care delivery models.

The Michigan Plan for Appropriate Tailored Healthcare in Pregnancy Prenatal Care Recommendations.

OBJECTIVE: To describe MiPATH (the Michigan Plan for Appropriate Tailored Healthcare in pregnancy) panel process and key recommendations for prenatal care delivery. METHODS: We conducted an appropriateness study using the RAND Corporation and University of California Los Angeles Appropriateness Method, a modified e-Delphi process, to develop MiPATH recommendations using sequential steps: 1) definition and scope of key terms, 2) literature review and data synthesis, 3) case scenario development, 4) panel selection and scenario revisions, and 5) two rounds of panel appropriateness ratings with deliberation. Recommendations were developed for average-risk pregnant individuals (eg, individuals not requiring care by maternal-fetal medicine specialists). Because prenatal services (eg, laboratory tests, vaccinations) have robust evidence, panelists considered only how services are delivered (eg, visit frequency, telemedicine). RESULTS: The appropriateness of key aspects of prenatal care delivery across individuals with and without common medical and pregnancy complications, as well as social and structural determinants of health, was determined by the panel. Panelists agreed that a risk assessment for medical, social, and structural determinants of health should be completed as soon as individuals present for care. Additionally, the panel provided recommendations for: 1) prenatal visit schedules (care initiation, visit timing and frequency, routine pregnancy assessments), 2) integration of telemedicine (virtual visits and home devices), and 3) care individualization. Panelists recognized significant gaps in existing evidence and the need for policy changes to support equitable care with changing practices. CONCLUSION: The MiPATH recommendations offer more flexible prenatal care delivery for average-risk individuals.

Cost Effectiveness of Latest Recommendations for Group B Streptococci Screening in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether group B streptococci (GBS) screening using the 2010 guideline (screening at 35 0/7-37 6/7 weeks of gestation) compared with the 2019 guideline (screening at 36 0/7-37 6/7 weeks of gestation with re-screening of women with GBS-negative results 5 weeks later) was more cost effective. METHODS: We constructed a decision-analysis model to compare the outcome of GBS early-onset disease in a hypothetical cohort of 3,614,049 women at 35 0/7 weeks of gestation or greater (the number of live births in 2017 excluding births based on population frequency from 23 to 34 weeks of gestation, women with GBS bacteriuria during the current pregnancy, and those with a history of a previous neonate with GBS disease). We took both a health care and societal perspective and all costs were expressed in 2017 U.S. dollars. Effectiveness was based on neonatal quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was estimated with a willingness to pay threshold set at $100,000/QALY. All model inputs were derived from the literature. One-way probability and cost sensitivity analysis were performed to investigate model assumptions. RESULTS: Screening at 36 0/7-37 6/7 weeks of gestation with re-screening of women with GBS-negative results if 5 weeks passed from culture to delivery resulted in a 6% increase in neonatal QALYs gained (2,162 vs 2,037), 12% fewer cases of neonatal death (30 vs 34), and a 10% estimated reduction in total societal health care expenditures related to GBS early-onset disease ($639 million vs $707 million) when compared with the 2010 strategy of only screening at 35 0/7-37 6/7 weeks of gestation. The 2019 approach was cost effective, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $43,205 per neonatal QALY gained. CONCLUSION: Screening at 36 0/7-37 6/7 weeks of gestation with a 5-week re-screening for women with GBS-negative results is more cost effective than past strategies used in the United States.

Training Patterns and Lifetime Career Achievements of US Academic Cardiothoracic Surgeons.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to investigate the impact of taking dedicated time for research (DTR) during training and/or getting a PhD on subsequent career achievements of US academic cardiothoracic surgeons. METHODS: Online resources (institutional Web sites, CTSNet, Scopus, NIH RePORTER) were queried to collect training information (timing of medical school/residency/fellowship graduation, DTR, PhD) and academic metrics (publications, citations, research funding) for 694 academic cardiothoracic surgeons practicing at 56 premiere US institutions. RESULTS: Excluding missing data, 464 (75 %) surgeons took DTR and 156 (25 %) did not; 629 (91 %) were MD only and 65 (9 %) also had a PhD. DTR was associated with higher number of ongoing publications (~5.6/year vs. ~3.8/year), with no difference for accrued number of total citations. History of DTR was more prevalent among surgeons with versus without NIH funding (87 vs. 71 %; p < 0.001), but no difference was seen across academic ranks and among those who were division/department chiefs. No overall increase in publications/citations, academic rank advancement, NIH funding, or leadership roles was found for those with a PhD. CONCLUSIONS: Among cardiothoracic surgeons, devoting time during the training years exclusively to research might be associated with higher career-long academic productivity in terms of annual number new publications and ability to get NIH funding, but without significant impact in terms of academic rank or institutional role advancement. No significant difference was found between those with versus without a PhD in terms of career-long number of publications/citations, academic rank, NIH funding, or leadership role, even though sample size might have been insufficient to identify any such potential difference.

Cost-effectiveness of universal prophylaxis in pregnancy with prior group B streptococci colonization.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the costs and outcomes of rescreening for group B streptococci (GBS) compared to universal treatment of term women with history of GBS colonization in a previous pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN: A decision analysis model was used to compare costs and outcomes. Total cost included the costs of screening, intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP), treatment for maternal anaphylaxis and death, evaluation of well infants whose mothers received IAP, and total costs for treatment of term neonatal early onset GBS sepsis. RESULTS: When compared to screening and treating, universal treatment results in more women treated per GBS case prevented (155 versus 67) and prevents more cases of early onset GBS (1732 versus 1700) and neonatal deaths (52 versus 51) at a lower cost per case prevented ($8,805 versus $12,710). CONCLUSION: Universal treatment of term pregnancies with a history of previous GBS colonization is more cost-effective than the strategy of screening and treating based on positive culture results.