Search

Objectives: To assess the use and timing of scheduled cesareans and other categories of cesarean delivery and the prevalence of neonatal morbidity among cesareans in Oregon before and after the implementation of Oregon's statewide policy limiting elective early deliveries.Data Sources: Oregon vital statistics records, 2008-2013.Study Design: Retrospective cohort study, with multivariable logistic regression, regression controlling for time trends, and interrupted time series analyses, to compare the odds of different categories of cesarean delivery and the odds of neonatal morbidity pre- and postpolicy.Data Collection/extraction Methods: We analyzed vital statistics data on all term births in Oregon (2008-2013), excluding births in 2011.Principal Findings: The odds of early-term scheduled cesareans decreased postpolicy (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.70; 95 percent confidence interval [CI], 0.66-0.74). In the postpolicy period, there were mixed findings regarding assisted neonatal ventilation and neonatal intensive care unit admission, with regression models indicating higher postpolicy odds in some categories, but lower postpolicy odds after controlling for time trends.Conclusions: Oregon's hard stop policy limiting elective early-term cesarean delivery was associated with lower odds of cesarean delivery in the category of women who were targeted by the policy; more research is needed on impact of such policies on neonatal outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate the association of Oregon's hard-stop policy limiting early elective deliveries (before 39 weeks of gestation) and the rate of elective early-term inductions and cesarean deliveries and associated maternal-neonatal outcomes.Methods: This was a population-based retrospective cohort study of Oregon births between 2008 and 2013 using vital statistics data and multivariable logistic regression models. Our exposure was the Oregon hard-stop policy, defined as the time periods prepolicy (2008-2010) and postpolicy (2012-2013). We included all term or postterm, cephalic, nonanomalous, singleton deliveries (N=181,034 births). Our primary outcomes were induction of labor and cesarean delivery at 37 or 38 weeks of gestation without a documented indication on the birth certificate (ie, elective early term delivery). Secondary outcomes included neonatal intensive care unit admission, stillbirth, macrosomia, chorioamnionitis, and neonatal death.Results: The rate of elective inductions before 39 weeks of gestation declined from 4.0% in the prepolicy period to 2.5% during the postpolicy period (P<.001); a similar decline was observed for elective early-term cesarean deliveries (from 3.4% to 2.1%; P<.001). There was no change in neonatal intensive care unit admission, stillbirth, or assisted ventilation prepolicy and postpolicy, but chorioamnionitis did increase (from 1.2% to 2.2%, P<.001; adjusted odds ratio 1.94, 95% confidence interval 1.80-2.09).Conclusions: Oregon's statewide policy to limit elective early-term delivery was associated with a reduction in elective early-term deliveries, but no improvement in maternal or neonatal outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The justification of neonatal intensive care for extremely premature infants is contentious and of considerable importance. The goal of this report is to describe our experience implementing consensus medical staff guidelines used for counseling pregnant women threatening extremely premature birth between 22 and 26 weeks' postmenstrual age and to give an account of family preferences and the immediate outcome of their infants., Methods: Retrospective chart review was performed for all women threatening premature birth between 22 and 26 weeks postmenstrual age who presented to our high-risk obstetric service between June 2003 and December 2006. Women participated in comprehensive periviability counseling, which featured our specific obstetric and neonatology care recommendations for them and their infant at each gestational week. A subset of women were approached to obtain consent for a 2-step interview process beginning 3 days after the initial periviability counseling and followed with a 6- to 18-month assessment., Results: Two hundred sixty women were identified as eligible subjects. After periviability counseling, but before any birth, palliative comfort care was requested by a higher percentage of families at each decreasing week. Ninety-five of the 260 women delivered 121 infants at <27 weeks' postmenstrual age. At delivery, at the request of the families and with the agreement of the medical staff, the following proportions of these infants were provided palliative comfort care: 100% at 22 weeks, 61% at 23 weeks, 38% at 24 weeks, 17% at 25 weeks, and 0% at 26 weeks. All nonresuscitations and comfort care measures were supported by the medical and nursing staffs, and all infant deaths occurred within 171 minutes. Fifty women consented to a postcounseling interview, and 25 of them also participated in a follow-up interview 6 to 18 months later. The counseling process and the guidelines were viewed as highly understandable, useful, consistent, and done in a comfortable manner. The tone and content of the parental comments regarding the counseling process were very positive, even more so at the later interview. There were no complaints or negative comments regarding the counseling process or the infant outcomes., Conclusions: Rational, consensus periviability guidelines are well accepted and can be used by all neonatologists, obstetricians, and nurses who provide care to pregnant women and infants at extremely early gestational ages. Pregnant women see these guidelines as highly understandable, useful, consistent, and respectful. When encouraged to participate with attending staff in discussions involving morbidity and mortality outcomes of premature infants and consensus medical practice recommendations, a substantial proportion of parents will choose palliative comfort care for their extremely premature infant up through 25 weeks' postmenstrual age. We believe the choice of neonatal intensive care versus palliative comfort care in extremely premature infants rightfully belongs to medically informed parents. More research is needed to examine how these decisions are made under diverse conditions of culture, religion, and technology.