Search

Summary: Background: Infections and sepsis are leading causes of morbidity and mortality in women during pregnancy and the post-pregnancy period. Using data from the 2017 WHO Global Maternal Sepsis Study, we explored the use of early warning systems (EWS) in women at risk of sepsis-related severe maternal outcomes. Methods: On April 27, 2023, we searched the literature for EWS in clinical use or research in obstetric populations. We calculated the proportion of women for whom each existing EWS identified them as at risk for developing severe maternal outcomes by infection severity (complications and severe maternal outcomes). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, diagnostic odds ratios, and J statistics were calculated to assess EWS performance. Machine learning was used to test the diagnostic potential of routine maternal sepsis markers. Findings: 21 EWS were assessed in 2560 women from 46 countries with suspected or confirmed infections. The NICE Risk Stratification tool, Modified Shock Index, maternity Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome, and Early Maternal Infection Prompts scores had high sensitivity (88.1–97.5%) for identifying sepsis-related severe maternal outcomes. The quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) in Pregnancy score and Obstetrically modified SOFA had high specificity (90.4–100%) for identifying women with sepsis-related severe maternal outcomes. Furthermore, combinations of sepsis markers had very low sensitivity and high specificity using machine learning. Interpretation: No score demonstrated enough diagnostic accuracy to be used alone to identify sepsis. However, obstetric—and sepsis-specific EWS performed better for early identification of maternal sepsis than non-obstetric and non-sepsis-specific scoring systems. There are limitations to applying EWS to real-world data, mainly due to the incompleteness of medical data that hinders EWS effectiveness. There is a need to continue developing and testing criteria for early identification of maternal sepsis. Funding: UNDP-UNFPA-UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), WHO, Merck for Mothers, U.S. Agency for International Development, Wellcome Trust, and National Institute for Health and Care Research.

Objectives To assess the incidence of hospital admissions for covid-19 disease in pregnant women, severity of covid-19 disease, and medical treatment provided to pregnant women with moderate to severe covid-19 during the first 10 months of the pandemic.Design Individual patient data meta-analysis of population based cohorts in International Obstetric Survey Systems.Setting 10 European countries with national or regional surveillance within the International Obstetric Survey Systems (INOSS) collaboration using aligned definitions and case report forms: Belgium, France (regional), Italy, the Netherlands, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden (regional), and the UK. The dominant variant of the SARS-CoV-2 virus was the wild-type variant in all countries during the study period (1 March 2020 to 31 December 2020).Participants The source population was 1.7 million women giving birth (maternities) from 1 March 2020 to 31 December 2020; pregnant women were included if they were admitted to hospital and had a positive polymerase chain reaction test for the SARS-CoV-2 virus ≤7 days before hospital admission, during admission, or up to two days after giving birth. We further categorised the hospital admission in two groups; covid-19 admission (hospital admission due to covid-19 or with reported symptoms of covid-19 disease) or non-covid-19 admission (admission to hospital for obstetric healthcare or no symptoms of covid-19 disease).Main outcome measures Incidence of hospital admissions for covid-19 per 1000 maternities, frequency of moderate to severe covid-19 disease, and number of women who received specific medical treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Moderate to severe covid-19 disease was defined as maternal death, admission to an intensive care unit, or need for respiratory support.Results Among 1.7 million maternities, 9003 women were included in the study: 2350 (26.1%) were admitted to hospital because of covid-19 disease or had symptoms of disease. The pooled incidence of hospital admissions for covid-19 per 1000 maternities was 0.8 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.5 to 1.2, τ2=0.44), ranging from no hospital admissions in Iceland to 1.7 in France and 1.9 in the UK. 13 women died due to covid-19. Among 2219 women admitted to hospital for covid-19 in countries with complete information on respiratory support, 820 women (39.5%, 95% CI 34.6% to 44.4%, τ2=0.02) had moderate to severe covid-19 disease. At most, 16.8% (95% CI 7.7% to 32.9%, I2=81.8%, τ2=0.7) of women with moderate to severe covid-19 received specific medical treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infection with corticosteroids, although 66.6% (59.4% to 73.2%, I2=50.1, τ2=0.06) were given thromboprophylaxis.Conclusions Population based surveillance in 10 European countries during the first 10 months of the covid-19 pandemic showed variations in the risk of hospital admissions for covid-19 in pregnant women. This finding indicates that national public health policies likely had a substantial and previously unrecognised role in protecting pregnant women. Few pregnant women with moderate to severe covid-19 were given specific medical treatment for SARS-CoV-2 disease, even when there were no or minor safety concerns. Lessons for future pandemics include the importance of rapid, robust surveillance systems for maternal and perinatal health, and of including use for pregnant women early in the development and testing of medicines and vaccines for public health emergencies.

Background: Between 2002 and 2011, the incidence of severe primary postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) in Dutch women with von Willebrand disease (VWD) and hemophilia carriers (HCs) was 8% vs 4.5% in the general population. Objectives: To determine the contemporary incidence of severe primary PPH in women with VWD and HCs. Methods: All women with VWD or HCs who delivered between 2012 and 2017 were selected from all 6 Dutch hemophilia treatment centers. Data on patient and disease characteristics, peripartum hematologic and obstetric management, and outcomes were retrospectively collected. Incidence of severe primary (≥1000 mL of blood loss ≤24 hours after childbirth) and primary (≥500 mL within ≤24 hours after childbirth) PPH was compared with the (1) previous cohort and (2) general Dutch population and between (3) women with VWD and HCs with third-trimester coagulation activity levels

Abstract Background Caesarean section (CS) rates are rising. Shared decision making (SDM) is a component of patient-centered communication which requires adequate information and awareness. Women in Ghana have varying perceptions about the procedure. We sought to explore mothers’ knowledge. perceptions and SDM-influencing factors about CSs. Methods A transdisciplinary mixed-methods study was conducted at the maternity unit of Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital in Accra, Ghana from March to May, 2019. Data collection was done in four phases: in-depth interviews (n = 38), pretesting questionnaires (n = 15), three focus group discussions (n = 18) and 180 interviewer administered questionnaires about SDM preferences. Factors associated with SDM were analyzed using Pearson’s Chi-square test and multiple logistic regression. Results Mothers depicted a high level of knowledge regarding medical indications for their CS but had low level of awareness of SDM. The perception of a CS varied from dangerous, unnatural and taking away their strength to a life-saving procedure. The mothers had poor knowledge about pain relief in labour and at Caesarean section. Health care professionals attributed the willingness of mothers to be involved in SDM to their level of education. Husbands and religious leaders are key stakeholders in SDM. Insufficient consultation time was a challenge to SDM according to health care professionals and post-partum mothers. Women with parity ≥ 5 have a reduced desire to be more involved in shared decision making for Caesarean section. AOR = 0.09, CI (0.02–0.46). Conclusion There is a high knowledge about the indications for CS but low level of awareness of and barriers to SDM. The fewer antenatal care visits mothers had, the more likely they were to desire more involvement in decision making. Aligned to respectful maternity care principles, greater involvement of pregnant women and their partners in decision making process could contribute to a positive pregnancy experience. Education, including religious leaders and decision- making tools could contribute to the process of SDM.

Introduction Maternal vaccination is a promising strategy to reduce the burden of vaccine-preventable diseases for mothers and infants. We aimed to provide an up-to-date overview of the efficacy and safety of all available maternal vaccines.Methods We searched PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL and ClinicalTrials.gov on 1 February 2022, for phase III and IV randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared maternal vaccination against any pathogen with placebo or no vaccination. Primary outcomes were laboratory-confirmed or clinically confirmed disease in mothers and infants. Secondary safety outcomes included intrauterine growth restriction, stillbirth, maternal death, preterm birth, congenital malformations and infant death. Random effects meta-analysis were used to calculate pooled risk ratio’s (RR). Quality appraisal was performed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).Results Six RCTs on four maternal vaccines, influenza, tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis (Tdap), pneumococcal and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) were eligible. The overall risk of bias and certainty of evidence varied from low to high. Maternal influenza vaccination significantly reduced the number of laboratory-confirmed influenza cases (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.79, event rate 57 vs 98, 2 RCTs, n=6003, I2=0%), and clinically confirmed influenza cases in mothers (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.99, event rate 418 vs 472, 2 RCTs, n=6003, I2=0%), and laboratory-confirmed influenza in infants (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.85, event rate 98 vs 148, 2 RCTs, n=5883, I2=0%), although this was not significant for clinically confirmed influenza in infants (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.05, event rate 1371 vs 1378, 2 RCTs, n=5883, I2=0%). No efficacy data were available on maternal Tdap vaccination. Maternal pneumococcal vaccination did not reduce laboratory-confirmed and clinically confirmed middle ear disease (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.02, event rate 9 vs 18, 1 RCT, n=133 and RR 0.88 95% CI 0.69 to 1.12, event rate 42 vs 47, 1 RCT, n=133, respectively), and clinically confirmed lower-respiratory tract infection (LRTI) (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.43, event rate 18 vs 34, 1 RCT, n=70) in infants. Maternal RSV vaccination did not reduce laboratory-confirmed RSV LRTI in infants (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.01, event rate 103 vs 71, 1 RCT, n=4527). There was no evidence of a significant effect of any of the maternal vaccines on the reported safety outcomes.Conclusions The few RCTs with low event rates suggest that, depending on the type of maternal vaccine, the vaccine might effectively prevent disease and within its size does not show safety concerns in mothers and infants.PROSPERO registration number CRD42021235115.

Abstract Background and Aims To analyze outcomes of nationwide local audits of uterine rupture to draw lessons for clinical care. Methods Descriptive cohort study. Critical incident audit sessions within all local perinatal cooperation groups in the Netherlands. Women who sustained uterine rupture between January 1st, 2017 and December 31st, 2019. Main Outcome Measures Improvable factors, recommendations, and lessons learned for clinical care. Women's case histories were discussed in multidisciplinary perinatal audit sessions. Participants evaluated care against national and local clinical guidelines and common professional standards to identify improvable factors. Cases and outcomes were registered in a nationwide database. Results One hundred and fourteen women who sustained uterine rupture were discussed in local perinatal audit sessions by 40–60 participants on average: A total of 111 (97%) were multiparous of whom 107 (94%) had given birth by cesarean section in a previous pregnancy. The audit revealed 178 improvable factors and 200 recommendations. Six percent (N = 11) of the improvable factors were identified as very likely and 18% (N = 32) as likely to have a relationship with the outcome or occurrence of uterine rupture. Improvable factors were related to inadequate communication, absent, or unclear documentation, delay in diagnosing the rupture, and suboptimal management of labor. Speak up in case a suspicion arises, escalating care by involving specialist obstetricians, addressing the importance of accurate documentation, and improving training related to fetal monitoring were the most frequent recommendations and should be topics for team (skills and drills) training. Conclusions Through a nationwide incident audit of uterine rupture, we identified improvable factors related to communication, documentation, and organization of care. Lessons learned include “speaking up,” improving the transfer of information and team training are crucial to reduce the incidence of uterine rupture.

Objective To evaluate changes in awareness of maternal sepsis among healthcare providers resulting from the WHO Global Maternal Sepsis Study (GLOSS) awareness campaign.Design Independent sample precampaign/postcampaign through online and paper-based surveys available for over 30 days before campaign roll-out (pre) and after study data collection (post). Descriptive statistics were used for campaign recognition and exposure, and odds ratio (OR) and percentage change were calculated for differences in awareness, adjusting for confounders using multivariate logistic regression.Setting and participants Healthcare providers from 398 participating facilities in 46 low, middle and high-income countries.Intervention An awareness campaign to accompany GLOSS launched 3 weeks prior to data collection and lasting the entire study period (28 November 2017 to 15 January 2018) and beyond.Main outcome measures Campaign recognition and exposure, and changes in awareness.Results A total of 2188 surveys were analysed: 1155 at baseline and 1033 at postcampaign. Most survey respondents found the campaign materials helpful (94%), that they helped increase awareness (90%) and that they helped motivate to act differently (88%). There were significant changes with regard to: not having heard of maternal sepsis (−63.4% change, pre-OR/post-OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.68) and perception of confidence in making the right decisions with regard to maternal sepsis identification and management (7.3% change, pre-OR/post-OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.06).Conclusions Awareness raising campaigns can contribute to an increase in having heard of maternal sepsis and an increase in provider perception of confidence in making correct decisions. Offering the information to make accurate and timely decisions while promoting environments that enable self-confidence and support could improve maternal sepsis identification and management.

Introduction Ninety-nine per cent of all maternal and neonatal deaths occur in low-income and middle-income countries (LMIC). Prognostic models can provide standardised risk assessment to guide clinical management and can be vital to reduce and prevent maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity. This review provides a comprehensive summary of prognostic models for adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes developed and/or validated in LMIC.Methods A systematic search in four databases (PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, Global Health Library and The Cochrane Library) was conducted from inception (1970) up to 2 May 2018. Risk of bias was assessed with the PROBAST tool and narratively summarised.Results 1741 articles were screened and 21 prognostic models identified. Seventeen models focused on maternal outcomes and four on perinatal outcomes, of which hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (n=9) and perinatal death including stillbirth (n=4) was most reported. Only one model was externally validated. Thirty different predictors were used to develop the models. Risk of bias varied across studies, with the item ‘quality of analysis’ performing the least.Conclusion Prognostic models can be easy to use, informative and low cost with great potential to improve maternal and neonatal health in LMIC settings. However, the number of prognostic models developed or validated in LMIC settings is low and mirrors the 10/90 gap in which only 10% of resources are dedicated to 90% of the global disease burden. External validation of existing models developed in both LMIC and high-income countries instead of developing new models should be encouraged.PROSPERO registration number CRD42017058044.

OBJECTIVE:To compare the costs of a strategy of patient controlled remifentanil versus epidural analgesia for pain relief in labour. DESIGN:We performed a multicentre randomised controlled trial in 15 hospitals in the Netherlands, the RAVEL trial. Costs were analysed from a health care perspective alongside the RAVEL trial. POPULATION:Pregnant women of intermediate to high risk beyond 32 weeks gestation who planned vaginal delivery. METHODS:Women were randomised before the onset of labour, to receive either patient controlled remifentanil or epidural analgesia when pain relief was requested during labour. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Primary outcome for effectiveness was satisfaction with pain relief, expressed as the area under the curve (AUC). A higher AUC represents higher satisfaction with pain relief. Here, we present an economic analysis from a health care perspective including costs from the start of labour to ten days postpartum. Health-care utilization was documented in the Case Report Forms and by administering an additional questionnaire. RESULTS:The costs in the patient controlled remifentanil group (n = 687) and in the epidural group (n = 671) were €2900 versus €3185 respectively (mean difference of -€282 (95% CI -€611 to €47)). The (non-significant) higher costs in the epidural analgesia group could be mainly attributed to higher costs of neonatal admission. CONCLUSION:From an economic perspective, there is no preferential pain treatment in labouring intermediate to high risk women. Since patient controlled remifentanil is not equivalent to epidural analgesia with respect to AUC for satisfaction with pain relief we recommend epidural analgesia as the method of choice. However, if appropriately counselled on effect and side effects there is, from an economic perspective, no reason to deny women patient controlled remifentanil.