Long-term healthcare utilization and costs of babies born after assisted reproductive technologies (ART): a record linkage study with 10-years' follow-up in England.

STUDY QUESTION: Is the long-term health care utilization of children born after ART more costly to the healthcare system in England than children born to mothers with no fertility problems? SUMMARY ANSWER: Children born after ART had significantly more general practitioner (GP) consultations and higher primary care costs up to 10 years after birth, and significantly higher hospital admission costs in the first year after birth, compared to children born to mothers with no fertility problems. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: There is evidence that children born after ART are at an increased risk of adverse birth outcomes and a small increased risk of rare adverse outcomes in childhood. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We conducted a longitudinal study of 368 088 mother and baby pairs in England using a bespoke linked dataset. Singleton babies born 1997-2018, and their mothers, who were registered at GP practices in England contributing data to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), were identified through the CPRD GOLD mother-baby dataset; this data was augmented with further linkage to the mothers' Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) Register data. Four groups of babies were identified through the mothers' records: a 'fertile' comparison group, an 'untreated sub-fertile' group, an 'ovulation induction' group, and an ART group. Babies were followed-up from birth to 28 February 2021, unless censored due to loss to follow-up (e.g. leaving GP practice, emigration) or death. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The CPRD collects anonymized coded patient electronic health records from a network of GPs in the UK. We estimated primary care costs and hospital admission costs for babies in the four fertility groups using the CPRD GOLD data and the linked Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) Admitted Patient Care (APC) data. Linear regression was used to compare the care costs in the different groups. Inverse probability weights were generated and applied to adjust for potential bias caused by attrition due to loss to follow-up. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Children born to mothers with no fertility problems had significantly fewer consultations and lower primary care costs compared to the other groups throughout the 10-years' follow up. Regarding hospital costs, children born after ART had significantly higher hospital admission costs in the first year after birth compared to those born to mothers with no fertility problems (difference = £307 (95% CI: 153, 477)). The same pattern was observed in children born after untreated subfertility and ovulation induction. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: HFEA linkage uses non-donor data cycles only, and the introduction of consent for data use reduced the availability of HFEA records after 2009. The fertility groups were derived by augmenting HFEA data with evidence from primary care records; however, there remains some potential misclassification of exposure groups. The cost of neonatal critical care is not captured in the HES APC data, which may cause underestimation of the cost differences between the comparison group and the infertility groups. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The findings can help anticipate the financial impact on the healthcare system associated with subfertility and ART, particularly as the demand for these treatments grows. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): C.C. and this work were funded by a UK Medical Research Council Career Development Award [MR/L019671/1] and a UK MRC Transition Support Award [MR/W029286/1]. X.H. is an Australia National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Emerging Leadership Fellow [grant number 2009253]. The authors declare no competing interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Neonatal outcomes of maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection in the UK: a prospective cohort study using active surveillance.

BACKGROUND: Newborns may be affected by maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy. We aimed to describe the epidemiology, clinical course and short-term outcomes of babies admitted to a neonatal unit (NNU) following birth to a mother with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection within 7 days of birth. METHODS: This is a UK prospective cohort study; all NHS NNUs, 1 March 2020 to 31 August 2020. Cases were identified via British Paediatric Surveillance Unit with linkage to national obstetric surveillance data. Reporting clinicians completed data forms. Population data were extracted from the National Neonatal Research Database. RESULTS: A total of 111 NNU admissions (1.98 per 1000 of all NNU admissions) involved 2456 days of neonatal care (median 13 [IQR 5, 34] care days per admission). A total of 74 (67%) babies were preterm. In all, 76 (68%) received respiratory support; 30 were mechanically ventilated. Four term babies received therapeutic hypothermia for hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy. Twenty-eight mothers received intensive care, with four dying of COVID-19. Eleven (10%) babies were SARS-CoV-2 positive. A total of 105 (95%) babies were discharged home; none of the three deaths before discharge was attributed to SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSION: Babies born to mothers with SARS-CoV-2 infection around the time of birth accounted for a low proportion of total NNU admissions over the first 6 months of the UK pandemic. Neonatal SARS-CoV-2 was uncommon. STUDY REGISTRATION: ISRCTN60033461; protocol available at http://www.npeu.ox.ac.uk/pru-mnhc/research-themes/theme-4/covid-19 . IMPACT: Neonatal unit admissions of babies born to mothers with SARS-CoV-2 infection comprised only a small proportion of total neonatal admissions in the first 6 months of the pandemic. A high proportion of babies requiring neonatal admission who were born to mothers with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were preterm and had neonatal SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or other conditions associated with long-term sequelae. Adverse neonatal conditions were more common in babies whose SARS-CoV-2-positive mothers required intensive care compared to those whose SARS-CoV-2-positive mothers who did not.

Impact of sampling and data collection methods on maternity survey response: a randomised controlled trial of paper and push-to-web surveys and a concurrent social media survey.

BACKGROUND: Novel survey methods are needed to tackle declining response rates. The 2020 National Maternity Survey included a randomised controlled trial (RCT) and social media survey to compare different combinations of sampling and data collection methods with respect to: response rate, respondent representativeness, prevalence estimates of maternity indicators and cost. METHODS: A two-armed parallel RCT and concurrent social media survey were conducted. Women in the RCT were sampled from ONS birth registrations and randomised to either a paper or push-to-web survey. Women in the social media survey self-selected through online adverts. The primary outcome was response rate in the paper and push-to-web surveys. In all surveys, respondent representativeness was assessed by comparing distributions of sociodemographic characteristics in respondents with those of the target population. External validity of prevalence estimates of maternity indicators was assessed by comparing weighted survey estimates with estimates from national routine data. Cost was also compared across surveys. RESULTS: The response rate was higher in the paper survey (n = 2,446) compared to the push-to-web survey (n = 2,165)(30.6% versus 27.1%, difference = 3.5%, 95%CI = 2.1-4.9, p < 0.0001). Compared to the target population, respondents in all surveys were less likely to be aged < 25 years, of Black or Minority ethnicity, born outside the UK, living in disadvantaged areas, living without a partner and primiparous. Women in the social media survey (n = 1,316) were less representative of the target population compared to women in the paper and push-to-web surveys. For some maternity indicators, weighted survey estimates were close to estimates from routine data, for other indicators there were discrepancies; no survey demonstrated consistently higher external validity than the other two surveys. Compared to the paper survey, the cost saving per respondent was £5.45 for the push-to-web survey and £22.42 for the social media survey. CONCLUSIONS: Push-to-web surveys may cost less than paper surveys but do not necessarily result in higher response rates. Social media surveys cost significantly less than paper and push-to-web surveys, but sample size may be limited by eligibility criteria and recruitment window and respondents may be less representative of the target population. However, reduced representativeness does not necessarily introduce more bias in weighted survey estimates.

The impact of a universal late third-trimester scan for fetal growth restriction on perinatal outcomes in term singleton births: A prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate perinatal mortality, morbidity and obstetric intervention following the introduction of a universal late third-trimester ultrasound scan for growth restriction. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Oxfordshire (OUH), UK. POPULATION: Women with a non-anomalous singleton pregnancy undergoing pregnancy care and term delivery at OUH with an estimated due date (EDD) of birth between 1 January 2014 and 30 September 2019. METHODS: Universal ultrasound for fetal growth restriction between 35+0 and 36+6 weeks was introduced in 2016. The outcomes of the next 18 631 eligible term pregnancies were compared, adjusting for covariates and time, with the previous 18 636 who had clinically indicated ultrasounds only. 'Screen-positives' for growth restriction were managed according to a pre-determined protocol which included non-intervention for some small-for-gestational-age babies. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Extended perinatal mortality, a composite of mortality or encephalopathy Grade II-III, and expedited birth. Other outcomes included composite adverse outcomes used elsewhere, detection of low birthweight and birth from 37+0 to 38+6 weeks. RESULTS: Extended perinatal deaths decreased 27% and severe morbidity decreased 33% but neither change was statistically significant (adjusted odd ratio [aOR] 0.53, 95% confidence interval [C1] 00.18-1.56 and aOR 0.71, 95% CI 0.31-1.63). Expedited births changed from 35.2% to 37.7% (aOR 0.99, 95% CI 0.92-1.06). Birthweight (<10th centile) detection using fetal biometry alone was 31.4% and rose to 40.5% if all abnormal scan parameters were used. CONCLUSION: Improvements in mortality and severe morbidity subsequent to introducing a universal ultrasound for growth restriction are encouraging but remain unclear. Little change in intervention is possible. The antenatal detection of low birthweight remains poor but improves where markers of growth restriction are used.

The relationship between perineal trauma and postpartum psychological outcomes: a secondary analysis of a population-based survey.

BACKGROUND: Perineal trauma, involving either naturally occurring tears or episiotomy, is common during childbirth but little is known about its psychological impact. This study aimed to determine the associations between childbirth related perineal trauma and psychological outcomes reported by women three months after giving birth and to explore factors that could mediate relationships between perineal trauma and maternal psychological outcomes. METHODS: This study was a secondary analysis of data from a cross-sectional population-based survey of maternal and infant health. A total of 4,578 women responded to the survey, of which 3,307 had a vaginal birth and were eligible for inclusion into the analysis. Symptoms of depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress (PTS) symptoms were assessed using validated self- report measures. Physical symptoms were derived from a checklist and combined to produce a composite physical symptoms score. Regression models were fitted to explore the associations. RESULTS: Nearly three quarters of women experienced some degree of perineal trauma. Women who experienced perineal trauma reported having more postnatal physical symptoms (adjusted proportional odds ratio 1.47, 95%CI 1.38 to 1.57, p-value < 0.001), were more likely to report PTS symptoms (adjusted OR 1.19, 95%CI 1.04 to 1.36, p-value 0.010), and there was strong evidence that each unit increase in the physical symptoms score was associated with between 38 and 90% increased adjusted odds of adverse psychological symptoms. There was no evidence of association between perineal trauma and satisfaction with postnatal care, although there was strong evidence that satisfaction with labour and birth was associated with 16% reduced adjusted odds of depression and 30% reduced adjusted odds of PTS symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Women who experienced perineal trauma were more likely to experience physical symptoms, and the more physical symptoms a woman experienced the more likely she was to report having postnatal depression, anxiety and PTS symptoms. There was some evidence of a direct association between perineal trauma and PTS symptoms but no evidence of a direct association between perineal trauma and depression or anxiety. Assessment and management of physical symptoms in the postnatal period may play an important role in reducing both physical and psychological postnatal morbidity.

Disparities in who is asked about their perinatal mental health: an analysis of cross-sectional data from consecutive national maternity surveys.

BACKGROUND: The perinatal period is a vulnerable time, with one in five women experiencing mental health problems. Antenatal and postnatal appointments are key contact points for identifying women in need of support. Since 2014, the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has recommended that all women be asked about their mental health at their antenatal booking appointment and early in the postnatal period. The aim of this study was to assess the proportions of women who reported being asked about their mental health during the perinatal period across consecutive national maternity surveys (NMS) in England and to evaluate sociodemographic disparities in who was asked. METHODS: Secondary analysis was performed on cross-sectional data from the NMS in 2014-2020. In each survey, women reported whether they had been asked about their mental health antenatally (during their booking appointment) and postnatally (up to six months after giving birth). The proportions of women in each survey who reported being asked about their mental health were calculated and compared according to key sociodemographic characteristics and across survey years. Logistic regression was conducted to identify disparities in who was asked. RESULTS: The proportion of women who reported being asked about their mental health antenatally increased from 80.3% (95%CI:79.0-81.5) in 2014 to 83.4% (95%CI:82.1-84.7) in 2020, yet the proportion of women who reported being asked postnatally fell from 88.2% (95%CI:87.1-89.3) in 2014 to 73.7% (95%CI:72.2-75.2) in 2020. Ethnic minority women (aOR range:0.20 ~ 0.67) were less likely to report being asked about their mental health antenatally and postnatally across all surveys compared to White women. Women living in less socioeconomically advantaged areas (aOR range:0.65 ~ 0.75) and women living without or separately from a partner (aOR range:0.61 ~ 0.73) were also less likely to report being asked about their mental health, although there was less consistency in these disparities across the antenatal and postnatal periods and across surveys. CONCLUSIONS: Despite NICE recommendations, many women are still not asked about their mental health during the perinatal period, particularly after giving birth. Women from ethnic minority backgrounds are less likely to be asked and these disparities have persisted over time.

Prevalence and risk factors for postnatal mental health problems in mothers of infants admitted to neonatal care: analysis of two population-based surveys in England.

BACKGROUND: Previous research suggests that mothers whose infants are admitted to neonatal units (NNU) experience higher rates of mental health problems compared to the general perinatal population. This study examined the prevalence and factors associated with postnatal depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress (PTS), and comorbidity of these mental health problems for mothers of infants admitted to NNU, six months after childbirth. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of two cross-sectional, population-based National Maternity Surveys in England in 2018 and 2020. Postnatal depression, anxiety, and PTS were assessed using standardised measures. Associations between sociodemographic, pregnancy- and birth-related factors and postnatal depression, anxiety, PTS, and comorbidity of these mental health problems were explored using modified Poisson regression and multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS: Eight thousand five hundred thirty-nine women were included in the analysis, of whom 935 were mothers of infants admitted to NNU. Prevalence of postnatal mental health problems among mothers of infants admitted to NNU was 23.7% (95%CI: 20.6-27.2) for depression, 16.0% (95%CI: 13.4-19.0) for anxiety, 14.6% (95%CI: 12.2-17.5) for PTS, 8.2% (95%CI: 6.5-10.3) for two comorbid mental health problems, and 7.5% (95%CI: 5.7-10.0) for three comorbid mental health problems six months after giving birth. These rates were consistently higher compared to mothers whose infants were not admitted to NNU (19.3% (95%CI: 18.3-20.4) for depression, 14.0% (95%CI: 13.1-15.0) for anxiety, 10.3% (95%CI: 9.5-11.1) for PTS, 8.5% (95%CI: 7.8-9.3) for two comorbid mental health problems, and 4.2% (95%CI: 3.6-4.8) for three comorbid mental health problems six months after giving birth. Among mothers of infants admitted to NNU (N = 935), the strongest risk factors for mental health problems were having a long-term mental health problem and antenatal anxiety, while social support and satisfaction with birth were protective. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of postnatal mental health problems was higher in mothers of infants admitted to NNU, compared to mothers of infants not admitted to NNU six months after giving birth. Experiencing previous mental health problems increased the risk of postnatal depression, anxiety, and PTS whereas social support and satisfaction with birth were protective. The findings highlight the importance of routine and repeated mental health assessments and ongoing support for mothers of infants admitted to NNU.

Planned mode of birth after previous cesarean section and risk of undergoing pelvic floor surgery: A Scottish population-based record linkage cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The global rise in cesarean sections has led to increasing numbers of pregnant women with a history of previous cesarean section. Policy in many high-income settings supports offering these women a choice between planned elective repeat cesarean section (ERCS) or planned vaginal birth after previous cesarean (VBAC), in the absence of contraindications to VBAC. Despite the potential for this choice to affect women's subsequent risk of experiencing pelvic floor disorders, evidence on the associated effects to fully counsel women is lacking. This study investigated the association between planned mode of birth after previous cesarean section and the woman's subsequent risk of undergoing pelvic floor surgery. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A population-based cohort study of 47,414 singleton term births in Scotland between 1983 to 1996 to women with 1 or more previous cesarean sections was conducted using linked Scottish national routine datasets. Cox regression was used to investigate the association between planned as well as actual mode of birth and women's subsequent risk of having any pelvic floor surgery and specific types of pelvic floor surgery adjusted for sociodemographic, maternal medical, and obstetric-related factors. Over a median of 22.1 years of follow-up, 1,159 (2.44%) of the study population had pelvic floor surgery. The crude incidence rate of any pelvic floor surgery per 1,000 person-years was 1.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27 to 1.43 in the overall study population, 1.75, 95% CI 1.64 to 1.86 in the planned VBAC group and 0.66, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.75 in the ERCS group. Planned VBAC compared to ERCS was associated with a greater than 2-fold increased risk of the woman undergoing any pelvic floor surgery (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2.38, 95% CI 2.03 to 2.80, p < 0.001) and a 2- to 3-fold increased risk of the woman having surgery for pelvic organ prolapse or urinary incontinence (aHR 3.17, 95% CI 2.47 to 4.09, p < 0.001 and aHR 2.26, 95% CI 1.79 to 2.84, p < 0.001, respectively). Analysis by actual mode of birth showed these increased risks were only apparent in the women who actually had a VBAC, with the women who needed an in-labor non-elective repeat cesarean section having a comparable risk of pelvic floor surgery to those who had an ERCS. The main limitation of this study is the potential for misclassification bias. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that among women with previous cesarean section giving birth to a singleton at term, planned VBAC compared to ERCS is associated with an increased risk of the woman subsequently undergoing pelvic floor surgery including surgery for pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. However, these risks appear to be only apparent in women who actually give birth vaginally as planned, highlighting the role of vaginal birth rather than labor in pelvic floor dysfunction requiring surgery. The findings provide useful additional information to counsel women with previous cesarean section about the risks and benefits associated with their future birth choices.

Planned mode of birth after previous caesarean section and women's use of psychotropic medication in the first year postpartum: a population-based record linkage cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Policy in many high-income settings supports giving pregnant women with previous caesarean section a choice between an elective repeat caesarean section (ERCS) or planning a vaginal birth after previous caesarean (VBAC), provided they have no contraindications to VBAC. Despite the potential for this choice to influence women's mental health, evidence about the associated effect to counsel women and identify potential targets for intervention is limited. This study investigated the association between planned mode of birth after previous caesarean and women's subsequent use of psychotropic medications. METHODS: A population-based cohort study of 31 131 women with one or more previous caesarean sections who gave birth to a term singleton in Scotland between 2010 and 2015 with no prior psychotropic medications in the year before birth was conducted using linked Scottish national datasets. Cox regression was used to investigate the association between planned mode of birth and being dispensed psychotropic medications in the first year postpartum adjusted for socio-demographic, medical, pregnancy-related factors and breastfeeding. RESULTS: Planned VBAC (n = 10 220) compared to ERCS (n = 20 911) was associated with a reduced risk of the mother being dispensed any psychotropic medication [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78-0.92], an antidepressant (aHR 0.83, 95% CI 0.76-0.90), and at least two consecutive antidepressants (aHR 0.83, 95% CI 0.75-0.91) in the first year postpartum. CONCLUSIONS: Women giving birth by ERCS were more likely than those having a planned VBAC to be dispensed psychotropic medication including antidepressants in the first year postpartum. Further research is needed to establish the reasons behind this new finding.

Learning from a crisis: a qualitative study of the impact on mothers' emotional wellbeing of changes to maternity care during the COVID-19 pandemic in England, using the National Maternity Survey 2020.

BACKGROUND: Pregnancy and the postnatal period can be times of psychosocial stress and insecurity, but high quality maternity care and social support can help mothers cope with stress and feel more secure. The COVID-19 pandemic and associated social and economic disruption increased rates of antenatal and postnatal stress, anxiety and depression, and also had profound impacts on the organisation of maternity services in England. METHODS: This was a qualitative descriptive study of the impact of pandemic-related changes to maternity care on mothers' emotional wellbeing, using inductive thematic analysis of open text responses to the National Maternity Survey (NMS) 2020 in England. A random sample of 16,050 mothers who gave birth 11-24th May 2020 were invited to take part in the survey, and 4,611 responded, with 4,384 answering at least one open text question. RESULTS: There were three themes: 'Chaos: impact of uncertainty', 'Abandoned: impact of reduction in care', and 'Alone: impact of loss of social support'. Mothers valued maternity care and many experienced additional stress from chaotic changes and reduction in care during the pandemic; from health professionals' own uncertainty and anxiety; and from restrictions on essential social support during pregnancy, labour and birth. Others felt that health professionals had communicated and cared for them well despite the changes and restrictions, and these mothers felt psychologically safe. CONCLUSIONS: Planning for future crises should include considering how necessary adaptations to care can be implemented and communicated to minimise distress; ensuring that mothers are not deprived of social support at the time when they are at their most vulnerable; and supporting the psychological welfare of staff at a time of enormous pressure. There are also lessons for maternity care in 'normal' times: that care is highly valued, but trust is easily lost; that some mothers come into the maternity system with vulnerabilities that can be ameliorated or intensified by the attitudes of staff; that every effort should be made to welcome a mother's partner or chosen companion into maternity care; and that high quality postnatal care can make a real difference to mothers' wellbeing.

Management and implications of severe COVID-19 in pregnancy in the UK: data from the UK Obstetric Surveillance System national cohort.

INTRODUCTION: There is a lack of population level data on risk factors and impact of severe COVID-19 in pregnancy. The aims of this study were to determine the characteristics, and maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with severe COVID-19 in pregnancy compared with those with mild and moderate COVID-19 and to explore the impact of timing of birth. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a national, prospective cohort study. All pregnant women admitted to hospital in the UK with symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 from March 1, 2020 to October 31, 2021 were included. The severity of maternal infection (need for high flow or invasive ventilation, intensive care admission or died), pregnancy and perinatal outcomes, and the impact of timing of birth were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 4436 pregnant women, 13.9% (n = 616) had severe infection. Women with severe infection were more likely to be aged ≥30 years (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] aged 30-39 1.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.20-1.83), be overweight or obese (aOR 1.73, 95% CI 1.34-2.25 and aOR 2.52 95% CI 1.97-3.23, respectively), be of mixed ethnicity (aOR 1.93, 95% CI 1.17-3.21) or have gestational diabetes (aOR 1.43, 95% CI 1.09-1.87) compared with those with mild or moderate infection. Women with severe infection were more likely to have a pre-labor cesarean birth (aOR 8.84, 95% CI 6.61-11.83), a very or extreme preterm birth (28-31+ weeks' gestation, aOR 18.97, 95% CI 7.78-14.85; <28 weeks' gestation, aOR 12.35, 95% CI 6.34-24.05) and their babies were more likely to be stillborn (aOR 2.51, 95% CI 1.35-4.66) or admitted to a neonatal unit (aOR 11.61, 95% CI 9.28-14.52). Of 112 women with severe infection who were discharged and gave birth at a later admission, the majority gave birth ≥36 weeks (85.7%), noting that three women in this group (2.7%) had a stillbirth. CONCLUSIONS: Severe COVID-19 in pregnancy increases the risk of adverse outcomes. Information to promote uptake of vaccination should specifically target those at greatest risk of severe outcomes. Decisions about timing of birth should be informed by multidisciplinary team discussion; however, our data suggest that women with severe infection who do not require early delivery have mostly good outcomes but that those with severe infection at term may warrant rapid delivery.

Planned mode of delivery after previous cesarean section and short-term maternal and perinatal outcomes: A population-based record linkage cohort study in Scotland.

BACKGROUND: Policy consensus in high-income countries supports offering pregnant women with previous cesarean section a choice between planning an elective repeat cesarean section (ERCS) or attempting a vaginal birth, known as a planned vaginal birth after previous cesarean (VBAC), provided they do not have contraindications to planned VBAC. However, robust comprehensive information on the associated outcomes to counsel eligible women about this choice is lacking. This study investigated the short-term maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with planned mode of delivery after previous cesarean section among women delivering a term singleton and considered eligible to have a planned VBAC. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A population-based cohort of 74,043 term singleton births in Scotland between 2002 and 2015 to women with one or more previous cesarean sections was conducted using linked Scottish national datasets. Logistic or modified Poisson regression, as appropriate, was used to estimate the effect of planned mode of delivery on maternal and perinatal outcomes adjusted for sociodemographic, maternal medical, and obstetric-related characteristics. A total of 45,579 women gave birth by ERCS, and 28,464 had a planned VBAC, 28.4% of whom went on to have an in-labor nonelective repeat cesarean section. Compared to women delivering by ERCS, those who had a planned VBAC were significantly more likely to have uterine rupture (0.24%, n = 69 versus 0.04%, n = 17, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 7.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.9-13.9, p < 0.001), a blood transfusion (1.14%, n = 324 versus 0.50%, n = 226, aOR 2.3, 95% CI 1.9-2.8, p < 0.001), puerperal sepsis (0.27%, n = 76 versus 0.17%, n = 78, aOR 1.8, 95% CI 1.3-2.7, p = 0.002), and surgical injury (0.17% versus 0.09%, n = 40, aOR 3.0, 95% CI 1.8-4.8, p < 0.001) and experience adverse perinatal outcomes including perinatal death, admission to a neonatal unit, resuscitation requiring drugs and/or intubation, and an Apgar score < 7 at 5 minutes (7.99%, n = 2,049 versus 6.37%, n = 2,570, aOR 1.6, 95% CI 1.5-1.7, p < 0.001). However, women who had a planned VBAC were more likely than those delivering by ERCS to breastfeed at birth or hospital discharge (63.6%, n = 14,906 versus 54.5%, n = 21,403, adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.2, p < 0.001) and were more likely to breastfeed at 6-8 weeks postpartum (43.6%, n = 10,496 versus 34.5%, n = 13,556, aRR 1.2, 95% CI 1.2-1.3, p < 0.001). The effect of planned mode of delivery on the mother's risk of having a postnatal stay greater than 5 days, an overnight readmission to hospital within 42 days of birth, and other puerperal infection varied according to whether she had any prior vaginal deliveries and, in the case of length of postnatal stay, also varied according to the number of prior cesarean sections. The study is mainly limited by the potential for residual confounding and misclassification bias. CONCLUSIONS: Among women considered eligible to have a planned VBAC, planned VBAC compared to ERCS is associated with an increased risk of the mother having serious birth-related maternal and perinatal complications. Conversely, planned VBAC is associated with an increased likelihood of breastfeeding, whereas the effect on other maternal outcomes differs according to whether a woman has any prior vaginal deliveries and the number of prior cesarean sections she has had. However, the absolute risk of adverse outcomes is small for either delivery approach. This information can be used to counsel and manage the increasing number of women with previous cesarean section, but more research is needed on longer-term outcomes.

Methods to increase response rates to a population-based maternity survey: a comparison of two pilot studies.

BACKGROUND: Surveys are established methods for collecting population data that are unavailable from other sources; however, response rates to surveys are declining. A number of methods have been identified to increase survey returns yet response rates remain low. This paper evaluates the impact of five selected methods on the response rate to pilot surveys, conducted prior to a large-scale National Maternity Survey in England. METHODS: The pilot national maternity surveys were cross-sectional population-based questionnaire surveys of women who were three months postpartum selected at random from birth registrations. Women received a postal questionnaire, which they could complete on paper, online or verbally over the telephone. An initial pilot survey was conducted (pilot 1, n = 1000) to which the response rate was lower than expected. Therefore, a further pilot survey was conducted (pilot 2, n = 2000) using additional selected methods with the specific aim of increasing the response rate. The additional selected methods used for all women in pilot 2 were: pre-notification, a shorter questionnaire, more personable survey materials, an additional reminder, and inclusion of quick response (QR) codes to enable faster access to the online version of the survey. To assess the impact of the selected methods, response rates to pilot surveys 1 and 2 were compared. RESULTS: The response rate increased significantly from 28.7% in pilot 1 to 33.1% in pilot 2 (+ 4.4%, 95%CI:0.88-7.83, p = 0.02). Analysis of weekly returns according to time from initial and reminder mail-outs suggests that this increase was largely due to the additional reminder. Most respondents completed the paper questionnaire rather than taking part online or over the telephone in both pilot surveys. However, the overall response to the online questionnaire almost doubled from 1.8% in pilot 1 to 3.5% in pilot 2, corresponding to an absolute difference of 1.7% (95%CI:0.45-2.81, p = 0.01), suggesting that QR codes might have facilitated online participation. CONCLUSIONS: Declining survey response rates may be ameliorated with the use of selected methods. Further studies should evaluate the effectiveness of each of these methods using randomised controlled trials and identify novel strategies for engaging populations in survey research.

Ethnic differences in singleton preterm birth in England and Wales, 2006-12: Analysis of national routinely collected data.

BACKGROUND: Data recorded at birth and death registration in England and Wales have been routinely linked with data recorded at birth notification since 2006. These provide scope for detailed analyses on ethnic differences in preterm birth (PTB). OBJECTIVES: We aimed to investigate ethnic differences in PTB and degree of prematurity in England and Wales, taking into account maternal sociodemographic characteristics and to further explore the contribution of mother's country of birth to these ethnic differences in PTB. METHODS: We analysed PTB and degree of prematurity by ethnic group, using routinely collected and linked data for all singleton live births in England and Wales, 2006-2012. Logistic regression was used to adjust for mother's age, marital status/registration type, area deprivation and mother's country of birth. RESULTS: In the 4 634 932 births analysed, all minority ethnic groups except 'Other White' had significantly higher odds of PTB compared with White British babies (ORs between 1.04-1.25); highest odds were in Black Caribbean, Indian, Bangladeshi and Pakistani groups. Ethnic differences in PTB tended to be greater at earlier gestational ages. In all ethnic groups, odds of PTB were lower for babies whose mothers were born outside the UK. CONCLUSIONS: In England and Wales, Black Caribbean, Indian, Bangladeshi, Pakistani and Black African babies all have significantly increased odds of being born preterm compared with White British babies. Bangladeshis apart, these groups are particularly at risk of extremely PTB. In all ethnic groups, the odds of PTB are lower for babies whose mothers were born outside the UK. These ethnic differences do not appear to be wholly explained by area deprivation or other sociodemographic characteristics.

Formula versus donor breast milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants.

BACKGROUND: When sufficient maternal breast milk is not available, alternative forms of enteral nutrition for preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants are donor breast milk or artificial formula. Donor breast milk may retain some of the non-nutritive benefits of maternal breast milk for preterm or LBW infants. However, feeding with artificial formula may ensure more consistent delivery of greater amounts of nutrients. Uncertainty exists about the balance of risks and benefits of feeding formula versus donor breast milk for preterm or LBW infants. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of feeding with formula compared with donor breast milk on growth and development in preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants. SEARCH METHODS: We used the Cochrane Neonatal search strategy, including electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 5), Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (3 May 2019), as well as conference proceedings, previous reviews, and clinical trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing feeding with formula versus donor breast milk in preterm or LBW infants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data independently. We analysed treatment effects as described in the individual trials and reported risk ratios (RRs) and risk differences (RDs) for dichotomous data, and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a fixed-effect model in meta-analyses and explored potential causes of heterogeneity in subgroup analyses. We assessed the certainty of evidence for the main comparison at the outcome level using GRADE methods. MAIN RESULTS: Twelve trials with a total of 1879 infants fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Four trials compared standard term formula versus donor breast milk and eight compared nutrient-enriched preterm formula versus donor breast milk. Only the five most recent trials used nutrient-fortified donor breast milk. The trials contain various weaknesses in methodological quality, specifically concerns about allocation concealment in four trials and lack of blinding in most of the trials. Most of the included trials were funded by companies that made the study formula.Formula-fed infants had higher in-hospital rates of weight gain (mean difference (MD) 2.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.93 to 3.08 g/kg/day), linear growth (MD 1.21, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.65 mm/week) and head growth (MD 0.85, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.23 mm/week). These meta-analyses contained high levels of heterogeneity. We did not find evidence of an effect on long-term growth or neurodevelopment. Formula feeding increased the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (typical risk ratio (RR) 1.87, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.85; risk difference (RD) 0.03, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.05; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 33, 95% CI 20 to 100; 9 studies, 1675 infants).The GRADE certainty of evidence was moderate for rates of weight gain, linear growth, and head growth (downgraded for high levels of heterogeneity) and was moderate for neurodevelopmental disability, all-cause mortality, and necrotising enterocolitis (downgraded for imprecision). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In preterm and LBW infants, moderate-certainty evidence indicates that feeding with formula compared with donor breast milk, either as a supplement to maternal expressed breast milk or as a sole diet, results in higher rates of weight gain, linear growth, and head growth and a higher risk of developing necrotising enterocolitis. The trial data do not show an effect on all-cause mortality, or on long-term growth or neurodevelopment.

Psychosocial factors that mediate the association between mode of birth and maternal postnatal adjustment: findings from a population-based survey.

BACKGROUND: Mode of birth has been found to be associated with maternal postnatal adjustment with women who have Caesarean Sections (CS) thought to be at higher risk of emotional distress. However the relationship is complex and studies have demonstrated mixed findings. The aim of this study is to evaluate a model that explores the direct relationship between mode of birth and postnatal maternal adjustment at 3 months and indirect relationships through psychosocial variables. METHODS: A secondary analysis of a population-based survey conducted in England, UK in 2014. The analysis included primiparous women with singleton babies who provided information about mode of birth (n = 2139). RESULTS: Maternal postnatal adjustment, as measured by Maternal postnatal wellbeing and Satisfaction with care during labour and birth, varied by mode of birth. Women who had an unplanned CS had the poorest postnatal adjustment. Mode of birth was not associated with Maternal/infant sense of belonging. Four out of the five proposed mediation variables (Perceived control, Maternal expectation, Support in labour, How long until the mother held her baby), showed partial mediation of the relationship between mode of birth and both Maternal postnatal wellbeing and Satisfaction with care during labour and birth. The strongest mediator was Perceived control and the only variable not to show a significant mediation effect was Health of the infant at 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: Birth by unplanned, but not planned, caesarean section was associated with poorer maternal adjustment and instrumental birth was associated with lower maternal satisfaction with labour and birth. These relationships were found to be partially mediated by psychosocial variables. Psychosocial interventions in the perinatal period should be considered to optimise maternal postnatal adjustment.

Breastfeeding and Childhood Wheeze: Age-Specific Analyses and Longitudinal Wheezing Phenotypes as Complementary Approaches to the Analysis of Cohort Data.

Systematic reviews suggest that breastfeeding is associated with a lower risk of asthma, although marked heterogeneity exists. Using UK Millennium Cohort Study data (n = 10,126 children, born 2000-2002), we examined the association between breastfeeding duration and wheezing in the previous year, first for each age group separately (ages 9 months, 3 years, 5 years, 7 years, and 11 years) and then in terms of a longitudinal wheezing phenotype: "early transient" (wheezing any time up to age 5 years but not thereafter), "late onset" (any time from age 7 years but not beforehand), and "persistent" (any time up to age 5 years and any time from age 7 years). The association between breastfeeding and wheeze varied by age (2-sided P for interaction = 0.0003). For example, breastfeeding for 6-9 months was associated with lower odds of wheezing at ages 9 months, 3 years, and 5 years but less so at ages 7 years and 11 years (adjusted odds ratios = 0.73, 0.78, 0.79, 0.84, 1.06, respectively). There was a strong dose-response relationship for breastfeeding per month and early transient wheeze (adjusted odds ratio for linear trend = 0.961, 95% confidence interval: 0.942, 0.980) but no clear trend for late-onset or persistent wheeze. Our results identified heterogeneity in the association between breastfeeding and wheezing according to age at wheezing and wheezing phenotype.

Formula versus donor breast milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants.

BACKGROUND: When sufficient maternal breast milk is not available, alternative forms of enteral nutrition for preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants are donor breast milk or artificial formula. Donor breast milk may retain some of the non-nutritive benefits of maternal breast milk for preterm or LBW infants. However, feeding with artificial formula may ensure more consistent delivery of greater amounts of nutrients. Uncertainty exists about the balance of risks and benefits of feeding formula versus donor breast milk for preterm or LBW infants. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of feeding with formula compared with donor breast milk on growth and development in preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants. SEARCH METHODS: We used the Cochrane Neonatal search strategy, including electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 6), Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (until 8 June 2017), as well as conference proceedings and previous reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing feeding with formula versus donor breast milk in preterm or LBW infants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data independently. We analysed treatment effects as described in the individual trials and reported risk ratios (RRs) and risk differences (RDs) for dichotomous data, and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a fixed-effect model in meta-analyses and explored potential causes of heterogeneity in subgroup analyses. We assessed the quality of evidence for the main comparison at the outcome level using "Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation" (GRADE) methods. MAIN RESULTS: Eleven trials, in which 1809 infants participated in total, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Four trials compared standard term formula versus donor breast milk and seven compared nutrient-enriched preterm formula versus donor breast milk. Only the four most recent trials used nutrient-fortified donor breast milk. The trials contain various weaknesses in methodological quality, specifically concerns about allocation concealment in four trials and lack of blinding in most of the trials.Formula-fed infants had higher in-hospital rates of weight gain (mean difference (MD) 2.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.93 to 3.08 g/kg/day), linear growth (MD 1.21, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.65 mm/week) and head growth (MD 0.85, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.23 mm/week). We did not find evidence of an effect on long-term growth or neurodevelopment. Formula feeding increased the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (typical risk ratio (RR) 1.87, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.85; risk difference (RD) 0.03, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.06).The GRADE quality of evidence was moderate for rates of weight gain, linear growth, and head growth (downgraded for high levels of heterogeneity) and was moderate for neurodevelopmental disability, all-cause mortality, and necrotising enterocolitis (downgraded for imprecision). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In preterm and LBW infants, feeding with formula compared with donor breast milk, either as a supplement to maternal expressed breast milk or as a sole diet, results in higher rates of weight gain, linear growth, and head growth and a higher risk of developing necrotising enterocolitis. The trial data do not show an effect on all-cause mortality, or on long-term growth or neurodevelopment.