SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy in Denmark-characteristics and outcomes after confirmed infection in pregnancy: A nationwide, prospective, population-based cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Assessing the risk factors for and consequences of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during pregnancy is essential to guide clinical care. Previous studies on SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy have been among hospitalized patients, which may have exaggerated risk estimates of severe outcomes because all cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the pregnant population were not included. The objectives of this study were to identify risk factors for and outcomes after SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy independent of severity of infection in a universally tested population, and to identify risk factors for and outcomes after severe infection requiring hospital admission. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a prospective population-based cohort study in Denmark using data from the Danish National Patient Register and Danish Microbiology Database and prospectively registered data from medical records. We included all pregnancies between March 1 and October 31, 2020 and compared women with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test during pregnancy to non-infected pregnant women. Cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy were both identified prospectively and through register linkage to ensure that all cases were identified and that cases were pregnant during infection. Main outcome measures were pregnancy, delivery, maternal, and neonatal outcomes. Severe infection was defined as hospital admission due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms. RESULTS: Among 82 682 pregnancies, 418 women had SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy, corresponding to an incidence of 5.1 per 1000 pregnancies, 23 (5.5%) of which required hospital admission due to COVID-19. Risk factors for infection were asthma (odds ratio [OR] 2.19, 95% CI 1.41-3.41) and being foreign born (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.70-2.64). Risk factors for hospital admission due to COVID-19 included obesity (OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.00-7.51), smoking (OR 4.69, 95% CI 1.58-13.90), infection after gestational age (GA) 22 weeks (GA 22-27 weeks: OR 3.77, 95% CI 1.16-12.29; GA 28-36 weeks: OR 4.76, 95% CI 1.60-14.12), and having asthma (OR 4.53, 95% CI 1.39-14.79). We found no difference in any obstetrical or neonatal outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Only 1 in 20 women with SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy required admission to hospital due to COVID-19. Risk factors for admission comprised obesity, smoking, asthma, and infection after GA 22 weeks. Severe adverse outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy were rare.

Feasibility, quality and validity of narrative multisource feedback in postgraduate training: a mixed-method study.

OBJECTIVES: To examine a narrative multisource feedback (MSF) instrument concerning feasibility, quality of narrative comments, perceptions of users (face validity), consequential validity, discriminating capacity and number of assessors needed. DESIGN: Qualitative text analysis supplemented by quantitative descriptive analysis. SETTING: Internal Medicine Departments in Zealand, Denmark. PARTICIPANTS: 48 postgraduate trainees in internal medicine specialties, 1 clinical supervisor for each trainee and 376 feedback givers (respondents). INTERVENTION: This study examines the use of an electronic, purely narrative MSF instrument. After the MSF process, the trainee and the supervisor answered a postquestionnaire concerning their perception of the process. The authors coded the comments in the MSF reports for valence (positive or negative), specificity, relation to behaviour and whether the comment suggested a strategy for improvement. Four of the authors independently classified the MSF reports as either 'no reasons for concern' or 'possibly some concern', thereby examining discriminating capacity. Through iterative readings, the authors furthermore tried to identify how many respondents were needed in order to get a reliable impression of a trainee. RESULTS: Out of all comments coded for valence (n=1935), 89% were positive and 11% negative. Out of all coded comments (n=4684), 3.8% were suggesting ways to improve. 92% of trainees and supervisors preferred a narrative MSF to a numerical MSF, and 82% of the trainees discovered performance in need of development, but only 53% had made a specific plan for development. Kappa coefficients for inter-rater correlations between four authors were 0.7-1. There was a significant association (p<0.001) between the number of negative comments and the qualitative judgement by the four authors. It was not possible to define a specific number of respondents needed. CONCLUSIONS: A purely narrative MSF contributes with educational value and experienced supervisors can discriminate between trainees' performances based on the MSF reports.

Diagnostic criteria and reporting procedures for pre-eclampsia: a national survey among obstetrical departments in Denmark.

OBJECTIVE: A precondition for the rational use of obstetric databases in biomedical research is detailed knowledge on how data are being generated. We identified the diagnostic procedures and criteria for pre-eclampsia (PE) and assessed the level of obstetric training of the personnel responsible for the records submitted to the patient registry at the Danish National Board of Health. STUDY DESIGN: A structured questionnaire, including three case stories, was sent to the chief consultant of the department. RESULTS: Thirty-three out of the 34 Danish departments (97%) returned the questionnaire. Reporters of pregnancy diagnoses to the National Patient Registry differed widely in training. For complicated pregnancies, departments ranged from having only specialists reporting all cases to secretaries reporting up to 50%. Cut off limits of blood pressure (BP) and protein loss used to diagnose pre-eclampsia showed large differences across departments. The diagnoses given to three case stories showed little correlation to the criteria the departments reported using. CONCLUSION: Even in a small country like Denmark with 34 obstetrical departments, there was little consensus on the diagnostic criteria for pre-eclampsia. The findings emphasize the need for standardizing diagnostic criteria and reporting practice and may have implications on how to interpret data regarding pre-eclampsia.

Validity of preeclampsia-related diagnoses recorded in a national hospital registry and in a postpartum interview of the women.

In a population-based sample, the authors examined the validity of preeclampsia and related diagnoses recorded in a mandatory Danish national hospital discharge registry and in a standardized telephone interview of women who gave birth between 1998 and 2002. Using a "gold standard" for preeclampsia defined in accordance with the guidelines from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the authors reviewed hospital charts of 3,039 women and found that 61 of 88 preeclampsia cases (69.3%) and 24 of 55 cases of serious subtypes of preeclampsia (43.6%) were recorded as such by the registry. A total of 21 of 2,951 women without preeclampsia (0.71%) had a preeclampsia diagnosis in the registry. All registrations of serious subtypes of preeclampsia reflected true cases. The positive predictive value of a preeclampsia diagnosis in the registry was 74.4%. Including interview data reduced the sample size to 2,307 women. In this sample, of 62 women with preeclampsia, 45 (72.6%) reported in the interview to have had preeclampsia. Of 2,245 women with no preeclampsia, 31 (1.4%) reported to have had preeclampsia. The positive predictive value of the women's own report on preeclampsia was 59.2%. The authors conclude, for the purpose of etiologic studies, that the registry had acceptable validity, whereas the usefulness of self-reported information may be limited.