RESUMEN
Background: COVID-19 vaccines are safe in pregnancy, as they do not contain a live attenuated virus. Mass vaccination is a key to control the pandemic. Neonates have been shown to be susceptible to severe illness, so maternal vaccination is important to provide neonatal vaccination. Methods: The present study was conducted for a period of one year from November 21, 2021 to October 2O, 2022 at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology A.S.J.S.A.T.D.S. medical college, Fatehpur. It was a hospital-based cross-sectional study. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy, safety, attitude, side effect and maternal neonatal outcome of COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant women. Results: Out of 3320 pregnant women delivered, only 1170 (35.24%) received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine. 69.23% were unaware of the type of COVID-19 vaccine. 66.15% were vaccinated for both the doses before pregnancy. 12.30% of women had taken only the first dose of COVID vaccine before pregnancy. Majority had fever with chills after the first dose. Fatigue was most common side effect after second dose, and no one had any rash or allergic reaction. 56.15% delivered vaginally, 37.69% had LSCS for different obstetric indications, and 6.15% had instrumental delivery. During the antenatal period, 38.46% developed anemia, 11.54% had preterm labor, 2.05% had gestational diabetes, 2.30% developed preeclampsia, and 3.85% developed hypothyroidism. 3.07% prolonged labor in intrapartum period, and 6.92% women developed PPH. 50.77% newborns were between 2.5 and 2.9 kg, and majority 71.54% newborns had an APGAR score of 7 or more at 5 minutes. 14.62% newborns had meconium aspiration syndrome, 3.84% had respiratory distress syndrome, and 20.34% needed NICU admission more than 24 hours. Conclusion: Available data do not support increased risk of adverse outcome following COVID-19 vaccination. We recommend vaccination during pregnancy as benefit outweigh the potential risk. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13224-023-01918-w.
RESUMEN
Objective: To compare the efficacy of intracervical dinoprostone gel and hyaluronidase injection for induction of labour in term primigravida. Materials and methods: This is a hospital based analytical prospective interventional study conducted in a rural tertiary care centre over a period of 18 months. A total of 70 patients who required induction of labour for one or another reason with Bishop score of less than 6 were included in the study. All the cases were randomly divided into two groups, Group A received dinoprostone gel and Group B received hyaluronidase injection. Chi square test & unpaired T test were applied for statistical analysis. Results: Time interval from induction to active phase of labour was comparatively shorter in group A than in group B (10.74 ± 6.17 vs 15.94 ± 7.1) and the difference was significant (p= 0.001). Time interval from induction to delivery time was comparatively shorter in group A than group B (14.84 ± 8.86 vs 21.33 ± 7.86) and difference was significant (P= 0.009). Maternal complications were more common in group A as compared to group B. Conclusion: This study showed that labour could be accelerated significantly by intracervical injection of hyaluronidase. Hyaluronidase injection has less maternal and fetal side-effects as compared to dinoprostone gel and can be a good choice for induction of labour.
RESUMEN
Background The risks of adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes are not very clear in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-positive pregnant women. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the maternal and fetal outcomes in COVID-19-positive pregnancies. Methodology This prospective, cohort study was conducted in a tertiary care center over the period of one year. The study group comprised pregnant patients who presented with COVID-19 in the first and second waves of the pandemic. Maternal symptoms due to COVID-19 infection, comorbidities, number of admissions to the intensive care unit (ICU), and maternal mortality were noted for every patient. Perinatal outcomes were recorded in the form of intrauterine growth retardation (IUGR), mode of delivery, preterm deliveries, birth weight of newborns, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admissions, and neonatal mortality. Data analysis was done in the form of a variable percentage and mean ± standard deviation (SD). Results COVID-19-positive pregnant patients were mostly asymptomatic (48.07%). Term deliveries (37-40 weeks) were seen in 44 (89.8%) patients. The percentage of normal vaginal delivery was 74% and cesarean section was 24%. Out of 52 patients, two (3.8%) patients were admitted to the high dependency unit (HDU), one (1.9%) patient was admitted to the ICU, and 49 (94.3%) patients were in the isolation ward. Of the 49 live births, four (8.16%) newborns were admitted to the NICU. No neonatal death was recorded. Conclusions In this study, COVID-19-pregnant women were mostly asymptomatic. Neonates of COVID-19-infected women also mostly tested COVID-19 negative. More studies are needed with larger sample sizes to determine the effect of COVID-19 infection in pregnant women and neonates.
RESUMEN
Introduction Maternal near-miss and maternal mortality cases have common characters, especially in terms of risk factors. Both of them are indicators of the quality of health care services provided to pregnant women. Our center is a tertiary care center in a rural area of western Uttar Pradesh (U.P.) so we get a large number of referred cases from most of the rural areas of western U.P. and the adjoining areas of other states too, which sometimes end up in mortality. Thus this study was planned to find out the incidence of maternal near-miss events and compare the nature of near-miss events with maternal mortality. Goal and objectives The main objectives of the study were to determine the frequency of maternal near-miss events, observe the trend of near-miss events, and compare the nature of near-miss events with maternal mortality. Materials and methods It was a retrospective study conducted in the department of obstetrics and gynecology at Uttar Pradesh University of Medical Sciences (UPUMS), Saifai, Etawah, from July 2018 - June 2019, over a period of one year. Potentially life-threatening conditions and maternal mortalities were noted from the records of the hospital after taking ethical clearance from the institute. Near-miss cases were noted based on the Health and Family Welfare Government of India guidelines 2014. Data were collected and statistical analysis was performed using the Statistical Package of the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 21 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Results The maternal near-miss incidence ratio was 16.6/1000 live births, the maternal near-miss to mortality ratio was 1.9:1, and the mortality index was 0.34%. Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy were the most common causes of near-miss events (45.8%) followed by hemorrhage (23.6%) in this study. Conclusions Hypertensive disorders in pregnancy and hemorrhage were the two leading causes of near-miss events and mortality followed by sepsis. As the near-miss analysis indicates, the quality of health care and causes are almost similar to maternal mortality, so its registry should be done along with maternal mortality.
