Understanding Clinician Knowledge About Race Adjustment in the Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Calculator.

Disparities in maternal health outcomes are striking. Historical and biased clinical support tools have potential to exacerbate inequities. In 2022, NewYork-Presbyterian, with ∼25,000 annual births, and our academic partners, Columbia and Weill Cornell, launched a program to better understand practice patterns and clinician attitudes toward a vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) calculator, which predicts VBAC success. This article summarizes the program, focusing on the VBAC calculator utilization survey, which measured provider awareness of the revised calculator and key factors considered in patient counseling. Our preliminary findings warrant future research and education on the calculator's implications for counseling and outcomes.

Cervical Ripening Efficacy of Synthetic Osmotic Cervical Dilator Compared With Oral Misoprostol at Term: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether a synthetic osmotic cervical dilator is noninferior to oral misoprostol for cervical ripening. METHODS: In an open-label, noninferiority randomized trial, pregnant women undergoing induction of labor at 37 weeks of gestation or more with Bishop scores less than 6 were randomized to either mechanical cervical dilation or oral misoprostol. Participants in the mechanical dilation group underwent insertion of synthetic osmotic cervical dilator rods, and those in the misoprostol group received up to six doses of 25 micrograms orally every 2 hours. After 12 hours of ripening, oxytocin was initiated, with artificial rupture of membranes. Management of labor was at the physician's discretion. The primary outcome was the proportion of women achieving vaginal delivery within 36 hours of initiation of study intervention. Secondary outcomes included increase in Bishop score, mode of delivery, induction-to-delivery interval, total length of hospital stay, and patient satisfaction. On the basis of a noninferiority margin of 10%, an expected primary outcome frequency of 65% for misoprostol and 71% for mechanical methods, and 85% power, a sample size of 306 participants was needed. RESULTS: From November 2018 through January 2021, 307 women were randomized, with 151 evaluable participants in the synthetic osmotic cervical dilator group and 152 in the misoprostol group (there were four early withdrawals). The proportion of women achieving vaginal delivery within 36 hours was higher with mechanical cervical dilation compared with misoprostol (61.6% vs 59.2%), with an absolute difference of 2.4% (95% CI -9% to 13%), indicating noninferiority for the prespecified margin. No differences were noted in the mode of delivery. Tachysystole was more frequent in the misoprostol group (70 [46.4%] vs 35 [23.3%]; P=.01). Participants in the synthetic osmotic cervical dilator group reported better sleep, less unpleasant abdominal sensations, and lower pain scores (P<.05). CONCLUSION: Synthetic osmotic cervical dilator is noninferior to oral misoprostol for cervical ripening. Advantages of synthetic osmotic cervical dilator include a better safety profile and patient satisfaction, less tachysystole, lower pain scores, and U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03670836. FUNDING SOURCE: Medicem Technology s.r.o., Czech Republic.

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among pregnant, breastfeeding, and nonpregnant reproductive-aged women.

BACKGROUND: Although mass vaccination against COVID-19 may prove to be the most efficacious end to this deadly pandemic, there remain concern and indecision among the public toward vaccination. Because pregnant and reproductive-aged women account for a large proportion of the population with particular concerns regarding vaccination against COVID-19, this survey aimed at investigating their current attitudes and beliefs within our own institution. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to understand vaccine acceptability among pregnant, nonpregnant, and breastfeeding respondents and elucidate factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. STUDY DESIGN: We administered an anonymous online survey to all women (including patients, providers, and staff) at our institution assessing rates of acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination. Respondents were contacted in 1 of 3 ways: by email, advertisement flyers, and distribution of quick response codes at virtual town halls regarding the COVID-19 vaccine. Based on their responses, respondents were divided into 3 mutually exclusive groups: (1) nonpregnant respondents, (2) pregnant respondents, and (3) breastfeeding respondents. The primary outcome was acceptance of vaccination. Prevalence ratios were calculated to ascertain the independent effects of multiple patient-level factors on vaccine acceptability. RESULTS: The survey was administered from January 7, 2021, to January 29, 2021, with 1012 respondents of whom 466 (46.9%) identified as non-Hispanic White, 108 (10.9%) as non-Hispanic Black, 286 (28.8%) as Hispanic, and 82 (8.2%) as non-Hispanic Asian. The median age was 36 years (interquartile range, 25-47 years). Of all the respondents, 656 respondents (64.8%) were nonpregnant, 216 (21.3%) were pregnant, and 122 (12.1%) were breastfeeding. There was no difference in chronic comorbidities when evaluated as a composite variable (Table 1). A total of 390 respondents (39.2%) reported working in healthcare. Nonpregnant respondents were most likely to accept vaccination (457 respondents, 76.2%; P<.001) with breastfeeding respondents the second most likely (55.2%). Pregnant respondents had the lowest rate of vaccine acceptance (44.3%; P<.001). Prevalence ratios revealed all non-White races except for non-Hispanic Asian respondents, and Spanish-speaking respondents were less likely to accept vaccination (Table 3). Working in healthcare was not found to be associated with vaccine acceptance among our cohort. CONCLUSION: In this survey study of only women at a single institution, pregnant respondents of non-White or non-Asian races were more likely to decline vaccination than nonpregnant and breastfeeding respondents. Working in healthcare was not associated with vaccine acceptance.

COVID-19 in a community hospital.

The rapid spread of COVID-19 across the globe quickly and drastically changed the way we practice medicine. In order to respond to its effects, careful planning and implementation of new guidelines and protocols was crucial to ensure the safety of both patients and staff. Given the limitations of space, staff, and resources in the community hospitals, a centralized command center, robust lines of communication within the department and between departments, and contingency and surge planning in this setting were critical. This chapter focuses on the unique challenges of practicing within a Level II hospital during a global pandemic.

The safe motherhood initiative: The development and implementation of standardized obstetric care bundles in New York.

The medical literature demonstrates that inadequate hospital protocols or the lack of consistent protocols for diagnosis, management, consultation, and/or referral can lead to confusion and unnecessary variation in patient care. Incongruities in clinical settings have been repeatedly shown to compromise quality of patient outcomes. Accordingly, the development and adoption of standardized protocols as the best practice for addressing incidence of adverse events remains a top priority in health care quality and safety initiatives. Among the 127 hospital facilities that provide inpatient obstetrical care in New York State, adoption and uptake of standardized care management plans is sporadic at best. In 2001, to target the incidence of severe maternal outcomes and enhance the state of maternal health in New York, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) District II and the New York State Department of Health developed the Safe Motherhood Initiative. Today, the Initiative demonstrates that maternal care outcomes are well served through an organized culture of obstetric safety. ACOG District II assists hospitals to optimize their delivery of obstetric care via three toolkits containing standardized protocols for the diagnosis, prevention, and management of the leading causes of maternal mortality and morbidity: hemorrhage, hypertension, and pulmonary embolus.

Gynecologic symptoms and sexual function before and after liver transplantation.

OBJECTIVE: To determine gynecologic symptoms and sexual function in a group of patients awaiting liver transplantation and a second group after liver transplantation. STUDY DESIGN: A questionnaire was mailed to 524 women. Of these, 233 had had transplants, and 291 were on a waiting list. The Transplant Database was used to obtain demographic information regarding these patients, and data were analyzed based on population age, Child's classification, type of liver disease, and pretransplant or posttransplant status. RESULTS: The response rate was 53%. There was no difference in ethnic or age distribution between pretransplant and posttransplant patients. There were no significant differences in rates of amenorrhea, but there was a greater prevalence of amenorrhea in patients with hepatocellular vs. cholestatic diseases (60% vs. 19%, p = 0.009). There was a higher incidence of pad use for urinary incontinence in pretransplant vs. posttransplant patients (14% vs. 7%, p = 0.04). There was no difference in availability of a sexual partner, sexual activity, orgasm experience, dyspareunia, satisfaction with sex life, symptoms of organ prolapse or dysmenorrhea based on transplant status, disease etiology or Child's classification. CONCLUSION: Liver failure patients differed in some of their gynecologic symptoms depending on their disease etiology and transplant status, but sexuality remained unchanged.