Search

Introduction Though interest is growing for trials comparing planned delivery mode (vaginal delivery [VD]; cesarean section [CS]) in low-risk nulliparous women, appropriate study design is unclear. Our objective was to assess feasibility of three designs (preference trial [PCT], randomized controlled trial [RCT], partially randomized patient preference trial [PRPPT]) for a trial comparing planned delivery mode in low-risk women. Methods A cross-sectional survey of low-risk, nulliparous pregnant women (N = 416) and healthcare providers (N = 168) providing prenatal care and/or labor/delivery services was conducted in Argentina (2 public, 2 private hospitals). Proportion of pregnant women and providers willing to participate in each design and reasons for not participating were determined. Results Few women ( 85%). Believing randomization unacceptable (RCT, PRPPT) and desiring choice of delivery mode (RCT) were women's reasons for not participating. For providers, commonly cited reasons for not participating included unacceptability of performing CS without medical indication, difficulty obtaining informed consent, discomfort enrolling patients (all designs), and violating women's right to choose (RCT). Conclusions for Practice Important limitations were found for each trial design evaluated. The necessity of stronger evidence regarding delivery mode in low-risk women suggests consideration of additional designs, such as a rigorously designed cohort study or an RCT within an obstetric population with equivocal CS indications., Author(s): Melissa M. Amyx [sup.1] [sup.2] , Fernando Althabe [sup.2] , Julie Rivo [sup.3] , Verónica Pingray [sup.2] , Nicole Minckas [sup.2] , María Belizán [sup.2] , Luz Gibbons [sup.2] [...]

Objective: To assess changes in caesarean section (CS) rates in Europe from 2015 to 2019 and utilise the Robson Ten Group Classification System (TGCS) to evaluate the contribution of different obstetric populations to overall CS rates and trends. Design: Observational study utilising routine birth registry data. Setting: A total of 28 European countries. Population: Births at ≥22 weeks of gestation in 2015 and 2019. Methods: Using a federated model, individual‐level data from routine sources in each country were formatted to a common data model and transformed into anonymised, aggregated data. Main Outcome Measures: By country: overall CS rate. For TGCS groups (by country): CS rate, relative size, relative and absolute contribution to overall CS rate. Results: Among the 28 European countries, both the CS rates (2015, 16.0%–55.9%; 2019, 16.0%–52.2%) and the trends varied (from −3.7% to +4.7%, with decreased rates in nine countries, maintained rates in seven countries (≤ ± 0.2) and with increasing rates in 12 countries). Using the TGCS (for 17 countries), in most countries labour induction increased (groups 2a and 4a), whereas multiple pregnancies (group 8) decreased. In countries with decreasing overall CS rates, CS tended to decrease across all TGCS groups, whereas in countries with increasing rates, CS tended to increase in most groups. In countries with the greatest increase in CS rates (>1%), the absolute contributions of groups 1 (nulliparous term cephalic singletons, spontaneous labour), 2a and 4a (induction of labour), 2b and 4b (prelabour CS) and 10 (preterm cephalic singletons) to the overall CS rate tended to increase. Conclusions: The TGCS shows varying CS trends and rates among countries of Europe. Comparisons between European countries, particularly those with differing trends, could provide insight into strategies to reduce CS without clinical indication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives Whether racial/ethnic differences in prevalence/reporting of sleep disorders exist in pregnant women/women of child-bearing age is unknown. Study objectives were to estimate prevalence of sleep disorders and to examine racial/ethnic differences in sleep disorders, reporting of sleep issues, and amount of sleep among women of child-bearing age (15-44 years) in the US. Methods Through a secondary analysis of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2005-2010 (3175 non-pregnant, 432 pregnant women in main analysis), prevalence of sleep disorders, reporting of sleep disorders to a physician/health professional, and amount of sleep were estimated overall, by pregnancy status, and by race/ethnicity stratified by pregnancy status. Racial/ethnic differences in reporting of trouble sleeping by pregnancy status were examined using univariate and multivariate logistic regression. Results Prevalence of diagnosed sleep disorders among women of childbearing age was 4.9 % [3.9 % pregnant; 5.1 % non-pregnant (p < 0.01)]. Significantly fewer pregnant and non-pregnant minority women reported adequate sleep (7-8 h) than non-Hispanic white (white) women (p < 0.05). Among non-pregnant women, odds of report of trouble sleeping were significantly higher for white compared to black (aOR 0.47 [95 % CI 0.36, 0.61]) or Mexican-American women (aOR 0.29 [95 % CI 0.21, 0.41]); non-pregnant minority women were also significantly less likely to report trouble sleeping than white women when controlling for amount of sleep. Among pregnant women, these same trends were found. Discussion Compared to white women, minority women, despite reporting less adequate sleep, are less likely to report trouble sleeping, providing evidence of an important health disparity., Author(s): Melissa Amyx [sup.1] , Xu Xiong [sup.1] , Yiqiong Xie [sup.2] , Pierre Buekens [sup.1] Author Affiliations: (1) 0000 0001 2217 8588grid.265219.bTulane University School of Public Health and Tropical [...]

The objective of this paper is to describe gestational weight gain (GWG), to assess the applicability of the 2009 Institute of Medicine (IOM) guidelines, and to derive a GWG adequacy classification within a French cohort. We included twins from the national, prospective, population‐based JUmeaux MODe d'Accouchement (JUMODA) cohort study (2014–2015). Following the IOM approach, we selected a 'standard' population of term pregnancies with 'optimal' birthweight (≥2500 g; n = 2562). GWG adequacy (insufficient; adequate; excessive) was defined using IOM recommendations (normal body mass index [BMI]: 16.8–24.5 kg [also utilized for underweight BMI]; overweight: 14.1–22.7 kg; obese: 11.4–19.1 kg). Additionally, using the IOM approach, we determined the 25th and 75th percentiles of GWG in our standard population to create a JUMODA‐derived GWG adequacy classification. GWG and GWG adequacy were described, overall and by BMI and parity. In the JUMODA standard population of term twin livebirths with optimal birthweight, mean GWG was 16.1 kg (standard deviation 6.3). Using IOM recommendations, almost half (46.5%) of the women had insufficient and few (10.0%) had excessive GWG, with similar results regardless of BMI or parity. The 25th and 75th percentiles of GWG in the JUMODA standard population (underweight: 13–21 kg; normal weight: 13–20 kg; overweight: 11–19 kg; obese: 7–16 kg) were lower than the IOM recommendations. The IOM recommendations classified a relatively high percentage of French women as having insufficient and a low percentage as having excessive GWG. Additional research to evaluate recommendations in relation to adverse perinatal outcomes is needed to determine whether the IOM recommendations or the JUMODA‐derived classification is more appropriate for French twin gestations. Key messages: Using the 2009 Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommendations to define gestational weight gain (GWG) adequacy in our French cohort classified almost half of women as having insufficient GWG and a relatively low percentage as having excessive GWG.The USA‐derived IOM definition for adequate GWG may not apply in France or in other non‐USA, contemporary obstetric populations.Additional research in large, population‐based contemporary cohorts with prospective GWG ascertainment and assessment of GWG adequacy classifications in relation to adverse outcomes is needed to inform evidence‐based GWG recommendations for twin pregnancies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]