Comparing depression screening tools (CESD-10, EPDS, PHQ-9, and PHQ-2) for diagnostic performance and epidemiologic associations among postpartum Kenyan women: Implications for research and practice.

BACKGROUND: Identifying optimal depression screening tools for use in maternal health clinics could improve maternal and infant health. We compared four tools for diagnostic performance and epidemiologic associations. METHODS: This study was nested in a cluster-randomized trial in Kenya. Women in 20 maternal health clinics were evaluated at 6 weeks postpartum with Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CESD-10), Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and -2 (PHQ-9, PHQ-2) for moderate-to-severe depressive symptoms (MSD) [CESD-10 ≥ 10, EPDS≥13, PHQ-9 ≥ 10, or PHQ-2 ≥ 3]. We assessed area under the curve (AUC) per scale (CESD-10, EPDS) against probable major depressive disorder (MDD) using the PHQ-9 scoring algorithm. Associations between MSD and intimate partner violence (IPV) were compared between scales. RESULTS: Among 3605 women, median age was 24 and 10 % experienced IPV. Prevalence of MSD symptoms varied by tool: 13 % CESD-10, 9 % EPDS, 5 % PHQ-2, 3 % PHQ-9. Compared to probable MDD, the CESD-10 (AUC:0.82) had higher AUC than the EPDS (AUC:0.75). IPV was associated with MSD using all scales: EPDS (RR:2.5, 95%CI:1.7-3.7), PHQ-2 (RR:2.3, 95%CI:1.6-3.4), CESD-10 (RR:1.9, 95%CI:1.2-2.9), PHQ-9 (RR:1.8, 95%CI:0.8-3.8). LIMITATIONS: Our study did not include clinical diagnosis of MDD by a specialized clinician, instead we used provisional diagnosis of probable MDD classified by the PHQ-9 algorithm as a reference standard in diagnostic performance evaluations. CONCLUSION: Depression screening tools varied in detection of postpartum MSD. The PHQ-2 would prompt fewer referrals and showed strong epidemiologic association with a cofactor.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection and Pregnancy in Sub-Saharan Africa: A 6-Country Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Few data are available on COVID-19 outcomes among pregnant women in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), where high-risk comorbidities are prevalent. We investigated the impact of pregnancy on SARS-CoV-2 infection and of SARS-CoV-2 infection on pregnancy to generate evidence for health policy and clinical practice. METHODS: We conducted a 6-country retrospective cohort study among hospitalized women of childbearing age between 1 March 2020 and 31 March 2021. Exposures were (1) pregnancy and (2) a positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test. The primary outcome for both analyses was intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Secondary outcomes included supplemental oxygen requirement, mechanical ventilation, adverse birth outcomes, and in-hospital mortality. We used log-binomial regression to estimate the effect between pregnancy and SARS-CoV-2 infection. Factors associated with mortality were evaluated using competing-risk proportional subdistribution hazards models. RESULTS: Our analyses included 1315 hospitalized women: 510 pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2, 403 nonpregnant women with SARS-CoV-2, and 402 pregnant women without SARS-CoV-2 infection. Among women with SARS-CoV-2 infection, pregnancy was associated with increased risk for ICU admission (adjusted risk ratio [aRR]: 2.38; 95% CI: 1.42-4.01), oxygen supplementation (aRR: 1.86; 95% CI: 1.44-2.42), and hazard of in-hospital death (adjusted sub-hazard ratio [aSHR]: 2.00; 95% CI: 1.08-3.70). Among pregnant women, SARS-CoV-2 infection increased the risk of ICU admission (aRR: 2.0; 95% CI: 1.20-3.35), oxygen supplementation (aRR: 1.57; 95% CI: 1.17-2.11), and hazard of in-hospital death (aSHR: 5.03; 95% CI: 1.79-14.13). CONCLUSIONS: Among hospitalized women in SSA, both SARS-CoV-2 infection and pregnancy independently increased risks of ICU admission, oxygen supplementation, and death. These data support international recommendations to prioritize COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant women.

"PrEP Gives the Woman the Control": Healthcare Worker Perspectives on Using pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) During Pregnancy and Postpartum in Kenya.

Background: Pregnant and postpartum women in high HIV prevalent regions are at increased HIV risk. Oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) can decrease HIV incidence reducing infant HIV infections. Understanding healthcare worker (HCW) beliefs about PrEP prior to national roll-out is critical to supporting PrEP scale-up. Methods: We conducted 45 semi-structured interviews among a range of HCW cadres with and without PrEP provision experience purposively recruited from four clinics in Kenya to compare their views on prescribing PrEP during pregnancy and postpartum. Interviews were analysed using a conventional content analysis approach to identify key influences on PrEP acceptability and feasibility. Results: All HCWs perceived PrEP as an acceptable and feasible HIV prevention strategy for pregnant and postpartum women. They believed PrEP meets women's needs as an on-demand, female-controlled prevention strategy that empowers women to take control of their HIV risk. HCWs highlighted their role in PrEP delivery success while acknowledging how their knowledge gaps, concerns and perceived PrEP implementation challenges may hinder optimal PrEP delivery. Conclusion: HCWs supported PrEP provision to pregnant and postpartum women. However, counseling tools to address risk perceptions in this population and strategies to reduce HCW knowledge gaps, concerns and perceived implementation barriers are required.

Challenges of Discrepant HIV Tests in Pregnant Women in the PrEP era-to Treat or Not to Treat?

BACKGROUND: During HIV retesting in antenatal and preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) care, discrepant results occur, but guidelines are lacking. METHODS: In a Kenyan trial implementing antenatal PrEP, if 1 test is reactive, a second is performed; if discrepant, both are repeated; if persistently discrepant, DNA polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is performed. RESULTS: Among 4451 women, 23 265 HIV retesting sessions were performed; 14 (0.06%, 95% confidence interval, 0.03%-0.10%) had discrepant results among 10 individuals; in all 10 initial cases, PCR was negative. CONCLUSIONS: Discrepant rapid tests are an expected, rare, and important challenge for antenatal care HIV retesting, with and without PrEP. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT03070600.

Effect of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Pregnancy on Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes in Africa: An AFREhealth Call for Evidence through Multicountry Research Collaboration.

In the African context, there is a paucity of data on SARS-CoV-2 infection and associated COVID-19 in pregnancy. Given the endemicity of infections such as malaria, HIV, and tuberculosis (TB) in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), it is important to evaluate coinfections with SARS-CoV-2 and their impact on maternal/infant outcomes. Robust research is critically needed to evaluate the effects of the added burden of COVID-19 in pregnancy, to help develop evidence-based policies toward improving maternal and infant outcomes. In this perspective, we briefly review current knowledge on the clinical features of COVID-19 in pregnancy; the risks of preterm birth and cesarean delivery secondary to comorbid severity; the effects of maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection on the fetus/neonate; and in utero mother-to-child SARS-CoV-2 transmission. We further highlight the need to conduct multicountry surveillance as well as retrospective and prospective cohort studies across SSA. This will enable assessments of SARS-CoV-2 burden among pregnant African women and improve the understanding of the spectrum of COVID-19 manifestations in this population, which may be living with or without HIV, TB, and/or other coinfections/comorbidities. In addition, multicountry studies will allow a better understanding of risk factors and outcomes to be compared across countries and subregions. Such an approach will encourage and strengthen much-needed intra-African, south-to-south multidisciplinary and interprofessional research collaborations. The African Forum for Research and Education in Health's COVID-19 Research Working Group has embarked upon such a collaboration across Western, Central, Eastern and Southern Africa.

PrEP Implementation for Mothers in Antenatal Care (PrIMA): study protocol of a cluster randomised trial.

INTRODUCTION: Women in regions with high HIV prevalence are at high risk of HIV acquisition during pregnancy and postpartum, and acute maternal HIV contributes a substantial proportion of infant HIV infections. Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) could prevent HIV during pregnancy/postpartum; however, identifying women who would most benefit from PrEP in this period is challenging. Women may not perceive risk, may not know partner HIV status and partners may have external partners during this period. PrEP offer in pregnancy could be universal or risk guided. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The PrEP Implementation for Mothers in Antenatal Care (PrIMA) study is a cluster randomised trial that aims to determine the best model for PrEP implementation in pregnancy, among women attending public sector maternal child health clinics in Western Kenya (HIV prevalence >25%). Twenty clinics are randomised to either universal PrEP offer following standardised counselling ('Universal arm' 10 clinics) or risk screening with partner self-test option ('Targeted arm' 10 clinics). Four thousand women will be enrolled and followed through 9-month postpartum. The primary analysis will be intention to treat. Outcomes reflect the balance between HIV preventive effectiveness and avoiding unnecessary PrEP exposure to women at low risk and include: maternal HIV incidence, PrEP uptake, PrEP adherence, PrEP duration, 'appropriate' PrEP use (among women with objective evidence of potential risk), infant birth outcomes, infant growth and partner self-testing uptake. To better understand the feasibility and acceptability of the provision of PrEP in these settings, qualitative interviews and cost-effectiveness analyses will be conducted. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol was approved by the institutional review boards at Kenyatta National Hospital and the University of Washington. An external advisory panel monitors adverse and social harm events. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, presentations at local and international conferences to national and global policy makers, community and participants. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03070600.