Building Healthy Babies: A Mixed-Methods Needs Assessment for a Pre-Conception Program in Ontario.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to gather Ontario clinicians' and public members' views on the design of a pre-conception patient education program. METHODS: In this mixed-methods study, online surveys comprised of rank order, multiple choice, and short answer questions were completed by clinicians and public members. Semi-structured focus groups consisting of 2-6 participants each were then held via videoconference. Demographic variables and survey responses were analyzed quantitatively using descriptive and summary statistics. Descriptive thematic qualitative analysis using the constant comparative method of grounded theory was completed on each transcript to generate themes. RESULTS: A total of 168 public members and 43 clinicians in Ontario completed surveys, while 11 clinicians and 11 public members participated in the focus groups. A pre-conception program in Ontario was felt to be important. An individual appointment with a primary care provider was the favoured program format per survey responses, whereas a virtual format with an interactive component was preferred among focus group participants. Important topics to include were pre-conception health (infertility, genetic screening, folic acid), prenatal and postpartum counselling (diet, activity, substance use, prenatal care, postpartum course), and medical optimization in pregnancy (high-risk medical conditions, medications, mental health). Both groups emphasized the need to consider accommodations for marginalized populations and various cultures and languages. CONCLUSION: A standardized pre-conception patient education program is felt to be of high value by Ontario clinicians and public members. A pre-conception program may help improve obstetrical outcomes and decrease rates of major congenital anomalies in Ontario.

Recent Immigrants with Inflammatory Bowel Disease Have Significant Health-Care Utilization from Preconception to Postpartum: A Population Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Immigrants with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) may have increased health-care utilization during pregnancy compared to non-immigrants, though this remains to be confirmed. We aimed to characterize this between these groups. METHODS: We accessed administrative databases to identify women (age 18-55) with IBD with a singleton pregnancy between 2003-2018. Immigration status was defined as recent (< 5 years of date of conception), remote (≥ 5 years since date of conception), and none. Differences in ambulatory, emergency department (ED), hospitalization, endoscopic, and prenatal visits during 12-months preconception, pregnancy and 12-months postpartum were characterized. Region of immigration origin was ascertained. Multivariable negative binomial regression was performed for adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: 8880 pregnancies were included, 8304 in non-immigrants, 96 in recent immigrants, 480 in remote immigrants. Compared to non-immigrants, recent immigrants had the highest rates of IBD-specific ambulatory visits during preconception (aIRR 3.06, 95% CI, 1.93-4.85), pregnancy (aIRR 2.15, 95% CI, 1.35-3.42), and postpartum (aIRR 2.21, 1.37-3.57) and the greatest rates of endoscopy visits during preconception (aIRR 2.69, 95% CI, 1.64-4.41) and postpartum (aIRR 2.01, 95% CI, 1.09-3.70). There were no differences in ED and hospitalization visits between groups though those arriving from the Americas were the most likely to be hospitalized for any reason. All immigrants with IBD were less likely to have a first trimester prenatal visit. CONCLUSION: Recent immigrants were more likely to have IBD-specific ambulatory care but less likely to receive adequate prenatal care during pregnancy.

A Population-Based Test-Negative Matched Case-Control Analysis of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Effectiveness Among Pregnant People in Ontario, Canada.

OBJECTIVE: Pregnancy is a risk factor for severe SARS-CoV-2 infection, which can result in adverse pregnancy outcomes, thus making understanding vaccine effectiveness (VE) in this population important. This study aimed to assess the VE of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19-related hospitalization in pregnant people. METHODS: Population-based matched test-negative case-control study of pregnant people aged 18-49 years, of 12 or more weeks gestation in Ontario, Canada, symptomatic with possible SARS-CoV-2 infection, and having at least 1 positive (n = 1842) or negative (n = 8524) real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) SARS-CoV-2 test between December 14, 2020, and December 31, 2021. The exposure was receipt of ≥1 dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine versus no vaccination. Exposure was further stratified by number and recency of doses. The primary outcome was a positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test. As a secondary outcome, VE for COVID-19-related hospitalization was assessed. RESULTS: In the primary outcome analysis, there were 1821 positive cases, matched to 1821 negative controls. The mean (SD) maternal age was 31 (5) years. When compared to those unvaccinated, receipt of ≥1 dose was associated with an estimated VE of 39% (95% CI 29%-48%) for symptomatic infection, and 85% (95% CI 72%-92%) for COVID-19 hospitalization. VE estimates demonstrated waning with increased time since last vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: mRNA COVID-19 vaccines provide protection against symptomatic COVID-19 illness and are highly effective at preventing severe illness in pregnant people. The observed effect of vaccine waning highlights the importance of booster doses to provide optimal protection for pregnant people.

Implementation of Multiple Marker Screening for Preterm Preeclampsia in a Single Tertiary Obstetric Centre.

OBJECTIVES: Early assessment of pregnant individuals for risk of preterm preeclampsia (PE) is possible at the 11-14 week ultrasound visit using a validated multiple marker algorithm, allowing timely use of preventative low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (LDA) in high-risk patients. With no established early screening program for preterm PE in Canada, our objectives were to assess the acceptability and operational impact of routine screening for preterm PE during the 11-14 week ultrasound visit, evaluate uptake and adherence to LDA when recommended, and assess screening performance. METHODS: A prospective implementation study of preterm PE screening among pregnant patients at the ultrasound unit of a tertiary obstetric centre in Toronto, Canada. RESULTS: A total of 1057 patients were screened, with an acceptance rate of 87.1%. First-trimester ultrasound appointment time increased by a median time of 7 minutes (Interquartile range 6-9). By 16 weeks gestation, 88.7% of high-risk patients had started LDA, with adherence of 88.7%‒94.6% from 16‒36 weeks. Satisfaction with counselling was ≥7/10 in more than 95% of patients. There were 7 cases of preterm PE (0.73%), 3 in the low-risk group (0.35%), and 4 in the high-risk group (4.1%). When accounting for LDA use, the treatment-adjusted detection rate was 78.6%. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate successful implementation of a validated, effective screening and prevention program for preterm PE as a first step in the implementation of a broader program adaptable for cultural, access/equity considerations, and marker availability.

Predicting adverse outcomes in pregnant patients positive for SARS-CoV-2: a machine learning approach- a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Pregnant people are particularly vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infection and to ensuing severe illness. Predicting adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes could aid clinicians in deciding on hospital admission and early initiation of treatment in affected individuals, streamlining the triaging processes. METHODS: An international repository of 1501 SARS-CoV-2-positive cases in pregnancy was created, consisting of demographic variables, patient comorbidities, laboratory markers, respiratory parameters, and COVID-19-related symptoms. Data were filtered, preprocessed, and feature selection methods were used to obtain the optimal feature subset for training a variety of machine learning models to predict maternal or fetal/neonatal death or critical illness. RESULTS: The Random Forest model demonstrated the best performance among the trained models, correctly identifying 83.3% of the high-risk patients and 92.5% of the low-risk patients, with an overall accuracy of 89.0%, an AUC of 0.90 (95% Confidence Interval 0.83 to 0.95), and a recall, precision, and F1 score of 0.85, 0.94, and 0.89, respectively. This was achieved using a feature subset of 25 features containing patient characteristics, symptoms, clinical signs, and laboratory markers. These included maternal BMI, gravidity, parity, existence of pre-existing conditions, nicotine exposure, anti-hypertensive medication administration, fetal malformations, antenatal corticosteroid administration, presence of dyspnea, sore throat, fever, fatigue, duration of symptom phase, existence of COVID-19-related pneumonia, need for maternal oxygen administration, disease-related inpatient treatment, and lab markers including sFLT-1/PlGF ratio, platelet count, and LDH. CONCLUSIONS: We present the first COVID-19 prognostication pipeline specifically for pregnant patients while utilizing a large SARS-CoV-2 in pregnancy data repository. Our model accurately identifies those at risk of severe illness or clinical deterioration, presenting a promising tool for advancing personalized medicine in pregnant patients with COVID-19.

Obstetrical Outcomes of Patients with Epilepsy in a Canadian Tertiary Care Center (2014-2020).

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data on the obstetrical outcomes of Canadian pregnant patients with epilepsy, which may differ from the average Canadian pregnancy and from other populations of pregnant patients with epilepsy. METHODS: Pregnant patients with epilepsy were identified from a prospectively collected database of patients seen at the maternal-fetal medicine obstetrics program of Mount Sinai Hospital (Toronto, Canada) between January 1, 2014, and November 20, 2020. Pregnancy, delivery, and neonatal outcome data were retrieved from this database and described using 95% binomial confidence intervals. Comparisons of obstetrical outcomes over the same period among the Canadian population average, obtained from publicly available national health data, were done using one-proportion Z-tests for nominal variables and one-sample t-tests for continuous variables. RESULTS: In total, 282 pregnancies, from 224 patients, were included, which resulted in 274 live births. Mean maternal age was 32.8 years (s.d. = 4.6; population average [µ] = 30.9; p < 0.01), and 53% were primiparous (CI95% = 49%-61%; µ = 43%; p < 0.01). The observed rates of obstetrical complications were gestational hypertension 9% (CI95%=6%-13%; µ=7%; p=0.19), gestational diabetes 5% (CI95% = 3%-8%; µ = 9%; p = 0.02), cesarean section 44% (CI95% = 38%-50%; µ = 28%; p < 0.01), postpartum hemorrhage 5% (CI95% = 3%-8%; µ = 0.5%; p < 0.01), stillbirth 1% (CI95% = 0%-2%; µ=1%; p > 0.99), and prematurity 9% (CI95% = 6%-13%; µ = 8%; p = 0.44). CONCLUSION: In this cohort of Canadian pregnant patients with epilepsy from an urban tertiary care center, observed rates of obstetrical complications were rare and no higher than in the Canadian population over the same period, with the exception of cesarean section and postpartum hemorrhage. Future prospective studies that include primary care and rural settings are needed to increase the generalizability of those results.

One vs 2 courses of antenatal corticosteroids in pregnancies at risk of preterm birth: a secondary analysis of the MACS trial.

BACKGROUND: Birth is unpredictable and many patients who receive antenatal corticosteroids for preterm birth remain pregnant. Some professional societies recommend rescue antenatal corticosteroids for those who remain pregnant ≥14 days following the initial course. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore a single vs a second course of antenatal corticosteroids in terms of severe neonatal morbidity and mortality. STUDY DESIGN: This is a secondary analysis of the Multiple Courses of Antenatal Corticosteroids for Preterm Birth (MACS) trial. The MACS study was a randomized clinical trial conducted in 80 centers in 20 different countries from 2001 to 2006. Participants who received only 1 course of intervention (ie, either a second course of antenatal corticosteroids or placebo) were included in this study. The primary outcome was a composite of stillbirth, neonatal mortality in the first 28 days of life or before discharge, severe respiratory distress syndrome, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, intraventricular hemorrhage stage III and IV, periventricular leukomalacia, and necrotizing enterocolitis. Two subgroup analyses were planned to address the effect of a second course of antenatal corticosteroids on infants born before 32 weeks or within 7 days from the intervention. Moreover, a sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the effect of intervention on singleton pregnancies. Baseline characteristics were compared between the groups using chi-square and Student t tests. Multivariable regression analysis was performed to adjust for confounding variables. RESULTS: There were 385 and 365 participants included in the antenatal corticosteroid and placebo groups, respectively. The composite primary outcome occurred in 24% and 20% of participants in the antenatal corticosteroid and placebo groups, respectively (adjusted odds ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-1.57). Moreover, severe respiratory distress syndrome rate was similar between the 2 groups (adjusted odds ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.65-1.48). Newborns exposed to antenatal corticosteroids were more likely to be small for gestational age (14.9% vs 10.6%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.63; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-2.47). These findings remained true among singleton pregnancies for the primary composite outcome and birthweight <10th percentile (adjusted odds ratio, 1.29 [0.82-2.01]; and adjusted odds ratio, 1.74 [1.06-2.87]; respectively). Subgroup analyses of infants born before 32 weeks or within 7 days from the intervention did not show any benefits in terms of the composite primary outcome with antenatal corticosteroids vs placebo (50.5% vs 41.8% [adjusted odds ratio, 1.16; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-1.72]; and 42.3% vs 37.1% [adjusted odds ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.67-1.57]; respectively). CONCLUSION: Neonatal mortality and severe morbidities, including severe respiratory distress syndrome, were not improved by a second course of antenatal corticosteroids. Policy makers need to be thoughtful when recommending a second course of antenatal corticosteroids and consider whether not only short-term but also long-term benefits can be gained from such administration.

Differences in Healthcare Utilization in Women with and without Inflammatory Bowel Diseases During Preconception, Pregnancy and Postpartum: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Compared to those without inflammatory bowel disease [IBD], women with IBD may have increased healthcare utilization during pregnancy and postpartum, though this remains to be confirmed. We aimed to characterize this healthcare use between these groups. METHODS: Administrative databases were accessed to identify women [aged 18-55 years] with and without IBD who had a live, singleton pregnancy between 2003 and 2018. Differences in emergency department [ED] visits, hospitalizations and prenatal care during 12 months preconception, pregnancy and 12 months postpartum were characterized. Multivariable negative binomial regression was performed to report incidence rate ratios [IRRs] with 95% confidence intervals [95% CIs]. Covariates included maternal age at conception, location of residence, socioeconomic status and maternal comorbidity. RESULTS: In total, 6163 women with IBD [9158 pregnancies] and 1091 013 women without IBD [1729 411 pregnancies] were included. Women with IBD were more likely to visit the ED [IRR 1.13, 95% CI 1.08-1.18] and be hospitalized [IRR 1.11, 95% CI 1.01-1.21] during pregnancy, and visit the ED [IRR 1.21, 95% CI 1.15-1.27] and be hospitalized [IRR 1.18, 95% CI 1.05-1.32] during postpartum. On unadjusted analysis, women with IBD were more likely to be hospitalized for venous thromboembolic events. There was no difference in healthcare use in preconception. Finally, women with IBD also had a greater number of prenatal visits during pregnancy and were more likely to receive a first-trimester prenatal visit. CONCLUSION: Women with IBD have increased healthcare utilization during pregnancy and postpartum. Efforts should be made to increase ambulatory care access during this period, which in turn may reduce this health-services utilization.

Association of SARS-CoV-2 Infection During Pregnancy With Maternal and Perinatal Outcomes.

Importance: There are limited high-quality, population-level data about the effect of SARS-CoV-2 infection on pregnancy using contemporaneous comparator cohorts. Objectives: To describe maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy and to assess variables associated with severe disease in the pregnant population. Design, Setting, and Participants: CANCOVID-Preg is an observational surveillance program for SARS-CoV-2-affected pregnancies in Canada. This analysis presents exploratory, population-level data from 6 Canadian provinces for the period of March 1, 2020, to October 31, 2021. A total of 6012 pregnant persons with a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test result at any time in pregnancy (primarily due to symptomatic presentation) were included and compared with 2 contemporaneous groups including age-matched female individuals with SARS-CoV-2 and unaffected pregnant persons from the pandemic time period. Exposure: SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy. Incident infections in pregnancy were reported to CANCOVID-Preg by participating provinces/territories. Main Outcomes and Measures: Maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection as well as risk factors for severe disease (ie, disease requiring hospitalization, admission to an intensive care unit/critical care unit, and/or oxygen therapy). Results: Among 6012 pregnant individuals with SARS-CoV-2 in Canada (median age, 31 [IQR, 28-35] years), the greatest proportion of cases were diagnosed at 28 to 37 weeks' gestation (35.7%). Non-White individuals were disproportionately represented. Being pregnant was associated with a significantly increased risk of SARS-CoV-2-related hospitalization compared with SARS-CoV-2 cases among all women aged 20 to 49 years in the general population of Canada (7.75% vs 2.93%; relative risk, 2.65 [95% CI, 2.41-2.88]) as well as an increased risk of intensive care unit/critical care unit admission (2.01% vs 0.37%; relative risk, 5.46 [95% CI, 4.50-6.53]). Increasing age, preexisting hypertension, and greater gestational age at diagnosis were significantly associated with worse maternal outcomes. The risk of preterm birth was significantly elevated among SARS-CoV-2-affected pregnancies (11.05% vs 6.76%; relative risk, 1.63 [95% CI, 1.52-1.76]), even in cases of milder disease not requiring hospitalization, compared with unaffected pregnancies during the same time period. Conclusions and Relevance: In this exploratory surveillance study conducted in Canada from March 2020 to October 2021, SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy was significantly associated with increased risk of adverse maternal outcomes and preterm birth.

Preeclampsia and Severe Maternal Morbidity During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Population-Based Cohort Study in Ontario, Canada.

OBJECTIVE: Significant changes to the delivery of obstetrical care that occurred with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic may be associated with higher risks of adverse maternal outcomes. We evaluated preeclampsia/HELLP (hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes and low platelets) syndrome and composite severe maternal morbidity (SMM) among pregnant people who gave birth during the COVID-19 pandemic and compared these data with those of people who gave birth before the pandemic in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: This was a population-based, retrospective cohort study using linked administrative data sets from ICES. Data on pregnant people at ≥20 weeks gestation who gave birth between March 15, 2020, and September 30, 2021, were compared with those of pregnant people who gave birth within the same date range for the years 2015-2019. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess the effect of the pandemic period on the odds of preeclampsia/HELLP syndrome and composite SMM, adjusting for maternal baseline characteristics and comorbidities. RESULTS: There were no differences between the study periods in the adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for preeclampsia/HELLP syndrome among primiparous (aOR 1.00; 95% CI 0.91-1.11) and multiparous (aOR 0.94; 95% CI 0.81-1.09) patients and no differences for composite SMM (primiparous, aOR 1.00; 95% CI 0.95-1.05; multiparous, aOR 1.01; 95% CI 0.95-1.08). CONCLUSION: Adverse maternal outcomes were not higher among pregnant people who gave birth during the first 18 months of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario, Canada, when compared with those who gave birth before the pandemic.

Phenotype-Directed Management of Hypertension in Pregnancy.

Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy are among the most serious conditions that pregnancy care providers face; however, little attention has been paid to the concept of tailoring clinical care to reduce associated adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes based on the underlying disease pathogenesis. This narrative review discusses the integration of phenotype-based clinical strategies in the management of high-risk pregnant patients that are currently not common clinical practice: real-time placental growth factor testing at Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto and noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring to guide antihypertensive therapy at the University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle. Future work should focus on promoting more widespread integration of these novel strategies into obstetric care to improve outcomes of pregnancies at high risk of adverse maternal-fetal outcomes from these complications of pregnancy.

Adapting obstetric and neonatal services during the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The provision of care to pregnant persons and neonates must continue through pandemics. To maintain quality of care, while minimizing physical contact during the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-related Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV2) pandemic, hospitals and international organizations issued recommendations on maternity and neonatal care delivery and restructuring of clinical and academic services. Early in the pandemic, recommendations relied on expert opinion, and offered a one-size-fits-all set of guidelines. Our aim was to examine these recommendations and provide the rationale and context to guide clinicians, administrators, educators, and researchers, on how to adapt maternity and neonatal services during the pandemic, regardless of jurisdiction. METHOD: Our initial database search used Medical subject headings and free-text search terms related to coronavirus infections, pregnancy and neonatology, and summarized relevant recommendations from international society guidelines. Subsequent targeted searches to December 30, 2020, included relevant publications in general medical and obstetric journals, and updated society recommendations. RESULTS: We identified 846 titles and abstracts, of which 105 English-language publications fulfilled eligibility criteria and were included in our study. A multidisciplinary team representing clinicians from various disciplines, academics, administrators and training program directors critically appraised the literature to collate recommendations by multiple jurisdictions, including a quaternary care Canadian hospital, to provide context and rationale for viable options. INTERPRETATION: There are different schools of thought regarding effective practices in obstetric and neonatal services. Our critical review presents the rationale to effectively modify services, based on the phase of the pandemic, the prevalence of infection in the population, and resource availability.

COVID-19 pandemic and population-level pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in general population: A living systematic review and meta-analysis (Update#2: November 20, 2021).

INTRODUCTION: Conflicting reports of increases and decreases in rates of preterm birth (PTB) and stillbirth in the general population during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have surfaced. The objective of our study was to conduct a living systematic review and meta-analyses of studies reporting pregnancy and neonatal outcomes by comparing the pandemic and pre-pandemic periods. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We searched the PubMed and Embase databases and reference lists of articles published up until November 20, 2021, and included English language studies that compared outcomes between the COVID-19 pandemic time period with pre-pandemic time periods. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis using the inverse variance method. RESULTS: Fifty-two studies with low-to-moderate risk of bias, reporting on 2 372 521 pregnancies during the pandemic period and 28 518 300 pregnancies during the pre-pandemic period, were included. There was significant reduction in unadjusted estimates of PTB (43 studies, unadjusted odds ratio [uaOR] 0.95, 95% CI 0.93-0.98), but not in adjusted estimates (five studies, adjusted OR [aOR] 0.94, 95% CI 0.74-1.19). This reduction was noted in studies from single centers/health areas (29 studies, uaOR 0.90, 95% CI 0.85-0.94) but not in regional/national studies (14 studies, uaOR 0.99, 95% CI 0.99-1.01). There was reduction in spontaneous PTB (nine studies, uaOR 0.91, 95% CI 0.88-0.94) but not in induced PTB (eight studies, uaOR 0.90, 95% CI 0.79-1.01). There was no difference in the odds of stillbirth between the pandemic and pre-pandemic time periods (32 studies, uaOR 1.07, 95% CI 0.97-1.18 and three studies, aOR 1.18, 95% CI 0.86-1.63). There was an increase in mean birthweight during the pandemic period compared with the pre-pandemic period (nine studies, mean difference 21 g, 95% CI 13-30 g). The odds of maternal mortality were increased (five studies, uaOR 1.15, 95% CI 1.05-1.26); however, only unadjusted estimates were available, and the result was mostly influenced by one study from Mexico. There was significant publication bias for the outcome of PTB. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic may be associated with a reduction in PTB; however, referral bias cannot be excluded. There was no statistically significant difference in stillbirths between pandemic and pre-pandemic periods.

Coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in general population: A living systematic review and meta-analysis (updated Aug 14, 2021).

INTRODUCTION: Conflicting reports of increases and decreases in rates of preterm birth (PTB) and stillbirth in the general population during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have surfaced. The objective of our study was to conduct a living systematic review and meta-analyses of studies reporting pregnancy and neonatal outcomes by comparing the pandemic and pre-pandemic periods. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We searched PubMed and Embase databases, reference lists of articles published up until August 14, 2021 and included English language studies that compared outcomes between the COVID-19 pandemic time period and the pre-pandemic time periods. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis using the inverse variance method. RESULTS: Forty-five studies with low-to-moderate risk of bias, reporting on 1 843 665 pregnancies during the pandemic period and 23 564 552 pregnancies during the pre-pandemic period, were included. There was significant reduction in unadjusted estimates of PTB (35 studies, unadjusted odds ratio [uaOR] 0.95, 95% CI 0.92-0.98), but not in adjusted estimates (six studies, adjusted OR [aOR] 0.95, 95% CI 0.80-1.13). This reduction was noted in studies from single centers/health areas (25 studies, uaOR 0.90, 95% CI 0.86-0.96) but not in regional/national studies (10 studies, uaOR 0.99, 95% CI 0.95-1.02). There was reduction in spontaneous PTB (six studies, uaOR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81-0.96) and induced PTB (five studies, uaOR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81-0.97). There was no difference in the odds of stillbirth between the pandemic and pre-pandemic time periods (24 studies, uaOR 1.11, 95% CI 0.97-1.26 and four studies, aOR 1.06, 95% CI 0.81-1.38). There was an increase in mean birthweight during the pandemic period compared with the pre-pandemic period (six studies, mean difference 17 g, 95% CI 7-28 g). The odds of maternal mortality were increased (four studies, uaOR 1.15, 95% CI 1.05-1.26); however, only unadjusted estimates were available and the result was mostly influenced by one study from Mexico. There was significant publication bias for the outcome of PTB. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic may be associated with a reduction in PTB; however, referral bias cannot be excluded. There was no statistically significant difference in stillbirth between pandemic and pre-pandemic periods.

Neighbourhood material deprivation and severe maternal morbidity: a population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada.

OBJECTIVES: Rates of age-associated severe maternal morbidity (SMM) have increased in Canada, and an association with neighbourhood income is well established. Our aim was to examine SMM trends according to neighbourhood material deprivation quintile, and to assess whether neighbourhood deprivation effects are moderated by maternal age. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A population-based retrospective cohort study using linked administrative databases in Ontario, Canada. We included primiparous women with a live birth or stillbirth at ≥20 weeks' gestational age. PRIMARY OUTCOME: SMM from pregnancy onset to 42 days postpartum. We calculated SMM rate differences (RD) and rate ratios (RR) by neighbourhood material deprivation quintile for each of four 4-year cohorts from 1 April 2002 to 31 March 2018. Log-binomial multivariable regression adjusted for maternal age, demographic and pregnancy-related variables. RESULTS: There were 1 048 845 primiparous births during the study period. The overall rate of SMM was 18.0 per 1000 births. SMM rates were elevated for women living in areas with high material deprivation. In the final 4-year cohort, the RD between women living in high vs low deprivation neighbourhoods was 3.91 SMM cases per 1000 births (95% CI: 2.12 to 5.70). This was higher than the difference observed during the first 4-year cohort (RD 2.09, 95% CI: 0.62 to 3.56). SMM remained associated with neighbourhood material deprivation following multivariable adjustment in the pooled sample (RR 1.16, 95% CI: 1.11 to 1.21). There was no evidence of interaction with maternal age. CONCLUSION: SMM rate increases were more pronounced for primiparous women living in neighbourhoods with high material deprivation compared with those living in low deprivation areas. This raises concerns of a widening social gap in maternal health disparities and highlights an opportunity to focus risk reduction efforts toward disadvantaged women during pregnancy and postpartum.

COVID-19 pandemic and population-level pregnancy and neonatal outcomes: a living systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Conflicting reports of increases and decreases in rates of preterm birth (PTB) and stillbirth in the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic have surfaced. The objective of our study was to conduct a living systematic review and meta-analyses of studies reporting pregnancy and neonatal outcomes by comparing the pandemic and pre-pandemic periods. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We searched PubMed and Embase databases, reference lists of articles published up until 14 May 2021 and included English language studies that compared outcomes between the COVID-19 pandemic time period and pre-pandemic time periods. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis using the inverse variance method. RESULTS: Thirty-seven studies with low-to-moderate risk of bias, reporting on 1 677 858 pregnancies during the pandemic period and 21 028 650 pregnancies during the pre-pandemic period, were included. There was a significant reduction in unadjusted estimates of PTB (28 studies, unadjusted odds ratio [uaOR] 0.94, 95% confidence [CI] 0.91-0.98) but not in adjusted estimates (six studies, adjusted OR [aOR] 0.95, 95% CI 0.80-1.13). The reduction was noted in studies from single centers/health areas (uaOR 0.90, 95% CI 0.86-0.94) but not in regional/national studies (uaOR 0.99, 95% CI 0.95-1.03). There was reduction in spontaneous PTB (five studies, uaOR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.98) and induced PTB (four studies, uaOR 0.90, 95% CI 0.81-1.00). There was no reduction in PTB when stratified by gestational age <34, <32 or <28 weeks. There was no difference in stillbirths between the pandemic and pre-pandemic time periods (21 studies, uaOR 1.08, 95% CI 0.94-1.23; four studies, aOR 1.06, 95% CI 0.81-1.38). There was an increase in birthweight (six studies, mean difference 17 g, 95% CI 7-28 g) during the pandemic period. There was an increase in maternal mortality (four studies, uaOR 1.15, 95% CI 1.05-1.26), which was mostly influenced by one study from Mexico. There was significant publication bias for the outcome of PTB. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic time period may be associated with a reduction in PTB; however, referral bias cannot be excluded. There was no difference in stillbirth between the pandemic and pre-pandemic period.

PlGF (Placental Growth Factor) Testing in Clinical Practice: Evidence From a Canadian Tertiary Maternity Referral Center.

[Figure: see text].