Racial and ethnic disparities in reproductive medicine in the United States: a narrative review of contemporary high-quality evidence.

There has been increasing debate around how or if race and ethnicity should be used in medical research-including the conceptualization of race as a biological entity, a social construct, or a proxy for racism. The objectives of this narrative review are to identify and synthesize reported racial and ethnic inequalities in obstetrics and gynecology (ob/gyn) and develop informed recommendations for racial and ethnic inequity research in ob/gyn. A reproducible search of the 8 highest impact ob/gyn journals was conducted. Articles published between January 1, 2010 and June 30, 2023 containing keywords related to racial and ethnic disparities, bias, prejudice, inequalities, and inequities were included (n=318). Data were abstracted and summarized into 4 themes: 1) access to care, 2) adherence to national guidelines, 3) clinical outcomes, and 4) clinical trial diversity. Research related to each theme was organized topically under the headings i) obstetrics, ii) reproductive medicine, iii) gynecologic cancer, and iv) other. Additionally, interactive tables were developed. These include data on study timeline, population, location, and results for every article. The tables enable readers to filter by journal, publication year, race and ethnicity, and topic. Numerous studies identified adverse reproductive outcomes among racial and ethnic minorities as compared to white patients, which persist despite adjusting for differential access to care, socioeconomic or lifestyle factors, and clinical characteristics. These include higher maternal morbidity and mortality among Black and Hispanic/Latinx patients; reduced success during fertility treatments for Black, Hispanic/Latinx, and Asian patients; and lower survival rates and lower likelihood of receiving guideline concordant care for gynecological cancers for non-White patients. We conclude that many racial and ethnic inequities in ob/gyn cannot be fully attributed to patient characteristics or access to care. Research focused on explaining these disparities based on biological differences incorrectly reinforces the notion of race as a biological trait. More research that deconstructs race and assesses efficacy of interventions to reduce these disparities is needed.

Strategies for optimising early detection and obstetric first response management of postpartum haemorrhage at caesarean birth: a modified Delphi-based international expert consensus.

OBJECTIVE: There are no globally agreed on strategies on early detection and first response management of postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) during and after caesarean birth. Our study aimed to develop an international expert's consensus on evidence-based approaches for early detection and obstetric first response management of PPH intraoperatively and postoperatively in caesarean birth. DESIGN: Systematic review and three-stage modified Delphi expert consensus. SETTING: International. POPULATION: Panel of 22 global experts in PPH with diverse backgrounds, and gender, professional and geographic balance. OUTCOME MEASURES: Agreement or disagreement on strategies for early detection and first response management of PPH at caesarean birth. RESULTS: Experts agreed that the same PPH definition should apply to both vaginal and caesarean birth. For the intraoperative phase, the experts agreed that early detection should be accomplished via quantitative blood loss measurement, complemented by monitoring the woman's haemodynamic status; and that first response should be triggered once the woman loses at least 500 mL of blood with continued bleeding or when she exhibits clinical signs of haemodynamic instability, whichever occurs first. For the first response, experts agreed on immediate administration of uterotonics and tranexamic acid, examination to determine aetiology and rapid initiation of cause-specific responses. In the postoperative phase, the experts agreed that caesarean birth-related PPH should be detected primarily via frequently monitoring the woman's haemodynamic status and clinical signs and symptoms of internal bleeding, supplemented by cumulative blood loss assessment performed quantitatively or by visual estimation. Postoperative first response was determined to require an individualised approach. CONCLUSION: These agreed on proposed approaches could help improve the detection of PPH in the intraoperative and postoperative phases of caesarean birth and the first response management of intraoperative PPH. Determining how best to implement these strategies is a critical next step.

Point-of-care assessment of combined umbilical arterial and venous lactate: A potential screening test for neonatal acidosis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between point-of-care (POC) measurement of combined umbilical arterial and venous (CUAV) lactate and umbilical artery (UA) lactate to determine whether POC assessment of this sample could be an alternative screening modality for neonatal acidosis and aid prediction of neonatal morbidity. METHODS: In this cross-sectional pilot study, UA and CUAV cord blood samples were collected from live, singleton neonates delivered between June and August 2019, at a tertiary care center. UA samples were analyzed for pH and lactate using a blood gas analyzer. CUAV lactate was also assessed on a blood gas analyzer and at the POC. Linear regression was used to determine the correlation between these samples. RESULTS: A total of 152 neonates were included. There was a statistically significant correlation between CUAV lactate concentrations and UA lactate concentrations (R2  = 0.744). Additionally, CUAV lactate concentration measured at the POC was significantly correlated with that measured on a traditional blood gas analyzer (R2  = 0.928). CONCLUSION: POC testing of CUAV lactate is reliable and closely correlated with UA lactate concentrations, making POC testing of CUAV lactate a potential screening test for neonatal acidosis. More data are needed to establish standardization of this test relative to its predictive value in clinical neonatal outcomes.