Induction of labour at 39 weeks and adverse outcomes in low-risk pregnancies according to ethnicity, socioeconomic deprivation, and parity: A national cohort study in England.

BACKGROUND: Ethnic and socioeconomic inequalities in obstetric outcomes are well established. However, the role of induction of labour (IOL) to reduce these inequalities is controversial, in part due to insufficient evidence. This national cohort study aimed to identify adverse perinatal outcomes associated with IOL with birth at 39 weeks of gestation ("IOL group") compared to expectant management ("expectant management group") according to maternal characteristics in women with low-risk pregnancies. METHODS AND FINDINGS: All English National Health Service (NHS) hospital births between January 2018 and March 2021 were examined. Using the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) dataset, maternal and neonatal data (demographic, diagnoses, procedures, labour, and birth details) were linked, with neonatal mortality data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS). Women with a low-risk pregnancy were identified by excluding pregnancies with preexisting comorbidities, previous cesarean section, breech presentation, placenta previa, gestational diabetes, or a baby with congenital abnormalities. Women with premature rupture of membranes, placental abruption, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, amniotic fluid abnormalities, or antepartum stillbirth were excluded only from the IOL group. Adverse perinatal outcome was defined as stillbirth, neonatal death, or neonatal morbidity, the latter identified using the English composite neonatal outcome indicator (E-NAOI). Binomial regression models estimated risk differences (with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)) between the IOL group and the expectant management group, adjusting for ethnicity, socioeconomic background, maternal age, parity, year of birth, and birthweight centile. Interaction tests examined risk differences according to ethnicity, socioeconomic background, and parity. Of the 1 567 004 women with singleton pregnancies, 501 072 women with low-risk pregnancies and with sufficient data quality were included in the analysis. Approximately 3.3% of births in the IOL group (1 555/47 352) and 3.6% in the expectant management group (16 525/453 720) had an adverse perinatal outcome. After adjustment, a lower risk of adverse perinatal outcomes was found in the IOL group (risk difference -0.28%; 95% CI -0.43%, -0.12%; p = 0.001). This risk difference varied according to socioeconomic background from 0.38% (-0.08%, 0.83%) in the least deprived to -0.48% (-0.76%, -0.20%) in the most deprived national quintile (p-value for interaction = 0.01) and by parity with risk difference of -0.54% (-0.80%, -0.27%) in nulliparous women and -0.15% (-0.35%, 0.04%) in multiparous women (p-value for interaction = 0.02). There was no statistically significant evidence that risk differences varied according to ethnicity (p = 0.19). Key limitations included absence of additional confounding factors such as smoking, BMI, and the indication for induction in the HES datasets, which may mean some higher risk pregnancies were included. CONCLUSIONS: IOL with birth at 39 weeks was associated with a small reduction in the risk of adverse perinatal outcomes, with 360 inductions in low-risk pregnancies needed to avoid 1 adverse outcome. The risk reduction was mainly present in women from more socioeconomically deprived areas and in nulliparous women. There was no significant risk difference found by ethnicity. Increased uptake of IOL at 39 weeks, especially in women from more socioeconomically deprived areas, may help reduce inequalities in adverse perinatal outcomes.

Obstetric interventions and pregnancy outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic in England: A nationwide cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted maternity services worldwide and imposed restrictions on societal behaviours. This national study aimed to compare obstetric intervention and pregnancy outcome rates in England during the pandemic and corresponding pre-pandemic calendar periods, and to assess whether differences in these rates varied according to ethnic and socioeconomic background. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a national study of singleton births in English National Health Service hospitals. We compared births during the COVID-19 pandemic period (23 March 2020 to 22 February 2021) with births during the corresponding calendar period 1 year earlier. The Hospital Episode Statistics database provided administrative hospital data about maternal characteristics, obstetric inventions (induction of labour, elective or emergency cesarean section, and instrumental birth), and outcomes (stillbirth, preterm birth, small for gestational age [SGA; birthweight < 10th centile], prolonged maternal length of stay (≥3 days), and maternal 42-day readmission). Multi-level logistic regression models were used to compare intervention and outcome rates between the corresponding pre-pandemic and pandemic calendar periods and to test for interactions between pandemic period and ethnic and socioeconomic background. All models were adjusted for maternal characteristics including age, obstetric history, comorbidities, and COVID-19 status at birth. The study included 948,020 singleton births (maternal characteristics: median age 30 years, 41.6% primiparous, 8.3% with gestational diabetes, 2.4% with preeclampsia, and 1.6% with pre-existing diabetes or hypertension); 451,727 births occurred during the defined pandemic period. Maternal characteristics were similar in the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. Compared to the pre-pandemic period, stillbirth rates remained similar (0.36% pandemic versus 0.37% pre-pandemic, p = 0.16). Preterm birth and SGA birth rates were slightly lower during the pandemic (6.0% versus 6.1% for preterm births, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.96, 95% CI 0.94-0.97; 5.6% versus 5.8% for SGA births, aOR 0.95, 95% CI 0.93-0.96; both p < 0.001). Slightly higher rates of obstetric intervention were observed during the pandemic (40.4% versus 39.1% for induction of labour, aOR 1.04, 95% CI 1.03-1.05; 13.9% versus 12.9% for elective cesarean section, aOR 1.13, 95% CI 1.11-1.14; 18.4% versus 17.0% for emergency cesarean section, aOR 1.07, 95% CI 1.06-1.08; all p < 0.001). Lower rates of prolonged maternal length of stay (16.7% versus 20.2%, aOR 0.77, 95% CI 0.76-0.78, p < 0.001) and maternal readmission (3.0% versus 3.3%, aOR 0.88, 95% CI 0.86-0.90, p < 0.001) were observed during the pandemic period. There was some evidence that differences in the rates of preterm birth, emergency cesarean section, and unassisted vaginal birth varied according to the mother's ethnic background but not according to her socioeconomic background. A key limitation is that multiple comparisons were made, increasing the chance of false-positive results. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found very small decreases in preterm birth and SGA birth rates and very small increases in induction of labour and elective and emergency cesarean section during the COVID-19 pandemic, with some evidence of a slightly different pattern of results in women from ethnic minority backgrounds. These changes in obstetric intervention rates and pregnancy outcomes may be linked to women's behaviour, environmental exposure, changes in maternity practice, or reduced staffing levels.

Use of induction of labour and emergency caesarean section and perinatal outcomes in English maternity services: a national hospital-level study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the association between hospital-level rates of induction of labour and emergency caesarean section, as measures of "practice style", and rates of adverse perinatal outcomes. DESIGN: National study using electronic maternity records. SETTING: English National Health Service. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitals providing maternity care to women between April 2015 and March 2017. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Stillbirth, admission to a neonatal unit, and babies receiving mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: Among singleton term births, the risk of stillbirth was 0.15%; of admission to a neonatal unit 5.4%; and of mechanical ventilation 0.54%. There was considerable between-hospital variation in the induction of labour rate (minimum 17.5%, maximum 40.7%) and the emergency caesarean section rate (minimum 5.6%, maximum 17.1%). Women who gave birth in hospitals with a higher induction of labour rate had better perinatal outcomes. For each 5%-point increase in induction, there was a decrease in the risk of term stillbirth by 9% (OR 0.91; 95% CI 0.85 to 0.97) and mechanical ventilation by 14% (OR 0.86; 95% CI 0.79 to 0.94). There was no significant association between hospital-level induction of labour rates and neonatal unit admission at term (p>0.05). There was no significant association between hospital-level emergency caesarean section rates and adverse perinatal outcomes (p always >0.05). CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable between-hospital variation in the use of induction of labour and emergency caesarean section. Hospitals with a higher induction rate had a lower risk of adverse birth outcomes. A similar association was not found for caesarean section.

Maternal and perinatal outcomes of pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection at the time of birth in England: national cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Some studies have suggested that women with SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy are at increased risk of adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes, but these associations are still not clear. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the association between SARS-CoV-2 infection at the time of birth and maternal and perinatal outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: This is a population-based cohort study in England. The inclusion criteria were women with a recorded singleton birth between May 29, 2020, and January 31, 2021, in a national database of hospital admissions. Maternal and perinatal outcomes were compared between pregnant women with a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection recorded in the birth episode and those without. Study outcomes were fetal death at or beyond 24 weeks' gestation (stillbirth), preterm birth (<37 weeks' gestation), small for gestational age infant (small for gestational age; birthweight at the .05) in the rate of other maternal outcomes. The risk of neonatal adverse outcome (adjusted odds ratio, 1.45; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-1.66; P<.001), need for specialist neonatal care (adjusted odds ratio, 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.51; P=.03), and prolonged neonatal admission after birth (adjusted odds ratio, 1.61; 95% confidence interval, 1.49-1.75; P<.001) were all significantly higher for infants with mothers with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. When the analysis was restricted to pregnancies delivered at term (≥37 weeks), there were no significant differences in neonatal adverse outcome (P=.78), need for specialist neonatal care after birth (P=.22), or neonatal readmission within 4 weeks of birth (P=.05). Neonates born at term to mothers with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were more likely to have prolonged admission after birth (21.1% compared with 14.6%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.61; 95% confidence interval, 1.49-1.75; P<.001). CONCLUSION: SARS-CoV-2 infection at the time of birth is associated with higher rates of fetal death, preterm birth, preeclampsia, and emergency cesarean delivery. There were no additional adverse neonatal outcomes, other than those related to preterm delivery. Pregnant women should be counseled regarding risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection and should be considered a priority for vaccination.

Metabolic risk in contemporary children is unrelated to socio-economic status: longitudinal study of a UK urban population (EarlyBird 42).

Lifestyle interventions to improve health in young children tend to target areas of relative deprivation, but the evidence for so doing is largely historical. Accordingly, we have re-examined the link between deprivation, obesity and metabolic risk in contemporary UK children. Using a postcode-based index of multiple deprivation (IMD), we assessed 269 children from the community-based EarlyBird Study, attending 53 schools representing a wide socio-economic range. Annual measures of fatness from 5 to 8 yr included body mass index (BMI), waist circumference (WC), and sum of five skinfolds (SSF). A metabolic risk score, based on blood pressure, lipids and insulin resistance, was derived from annual fasting blood samples. There were no significant associations between deprivation and any measure of adiposity in girls (all p > 0.37). In boys, there was a weak but consistently inverse relationship between deprivation and WC (r = -0.19, p = 0.03) and BMI (r = -0.14, p = 0.09) at 8 yr. Changes in adiposity over 3 yr were unrelated to deprivation in boys. In girls there was a slight but significant increase in SSF only (1 mm/yr per 20 IMD units, p = 0.001). Importantly, in both genders, metabolic risk score was unrelated to deprivation throughout (r values -0.05 to -0.13, all p > 0.12), as was change in metabolic risk (all p > 0.30). Our data do not support the assumption that obesity, metabolic disturbance and thus risk of type 2 diabetes are more prevalent among poorer children. In today's increasingly obesogenic environment, youngsters from all backgrounds appear to be vulnerable, with population-wide implications for public health spending, and the prevention of diabetes in contemporary youth.

Consistency of children's dietary choices: annual repeat measures from 5 to 13 years (EarlyBird 49).

The objective of the present study was to explore the consistency of dietary choices made by children as they grow up. The dietary habits of 342 healthy children were reported annually from 5 to 13 years on a forty-five-item FFQ and analysed by factor analysis. The same two principal dietary patterns--'Healthy' and 'Unhealthy'--emerged each year, and their consistency was assessed using Tucker's congruence coefficient (φ). Individual dietary z-scores for both of these patterns were then calculated every year for each child, and their consistency was measured by Pearson's correlation coefficient (r). Linear mixed-effects modelling was used to investigate individual trends and to quantify reliability of the individual dietary z-scores. Dietary patterns were moderately consistent and systematic over time (0·65 ≤ φHealthy ≤ 0·76; 0·62 ≤ φUnhealthy ≤ 0·78). Individual choices were also consistent year-on-year (0·64 ≤ rHealthy ≤ 0·71; 0·57 ≤ rUnhealthy ≤ 0·68). Reliability rose from 70 % with a single measure to over 90 % with four consecutive measures. The quality of diet diminished over time in 29 % of the children and improved in only 14 %. Dietary habits appear to be set early and seldom improve spontaneously.

Validation of ethnicity in administrative hospital data in women giving birth in England: cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the accuracy of coding of ethnicity in National Health Service (NHS) administrative hospital records compared with self-declared records in maternity booking systems, and to assess the potential impact of misclassification bias. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of data from records of women giving birth in England (2015-2017). SETTING: NHS Trusts in England participating in a national audit programme. PARTICIPANTS: 1 237 213 women who gave birth between 1 April 2015 and 31 March 2017. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) Proportion of women with complete ethnicity; (2) agreement on coded ethnicity between maternity (maternity information systems (MIS)) and administrative hospital (Hospital Episode Statistics (HES)) records; (3) rates of caesarean section and obstetric anal sphincter injury by ethnic group in MIS and HES. RESULTS: 91.3% of women had complete information regarding ethnicity in HES. Overall agreement between data sets was 90.4% (κ=0.83); 94.4% when collapsed into aggregate groups of white/South Asian/black/mixed/other (κ=0.86). Most disagreement was seen in women coded as mixed in either data set. Rates of obstetrical events and complications by ethnicity were similar regardless of data set used, with the most differences seen in women coded as mixed. CONCLUSIONS: Levels of accuracy in ethnicity coding in administrative hospital records support the use of ethnicity collapsed into groups (white/South Asian/black/mixed/other), but findings for mixed and other groups, and more granular classifications, should be treated with caution. Robustness of results of analyses for associations with ethnicity can be improved by using additional primary data sources.