Search

Aims: We aimed to systematically synthesize the current published literature on neonatal growth outcomes associated with antiseizure medication (ASM) use during pregnancy. Methods: We searched seven databases, from inception to 23 March 2022. We investigated small for gestational age (SGA) and low birth weight (LBW) as primary outcomes and birth weight, birth height, cephalization index and head circumference as secondary outcomes. The primary analysis included pregnant people exposed to any ASM compared with unexposed pregnant people. Subgroup analysis included ASM class analysis, within epilepsy group analysis and polytherapy compared to monotherapy. Results: We screened 15 720 citations and included 65 studies in the review. Exposed pregnant people had a significantly increased risk of SGA relative risk (RR) 1.33 (95% CI 1.18 to 1.50, I2 74%), LBW RR 1.54 (95% CI 1.33 to 1.77, I2 67%), and decreased birth weight with a mean difference (MD) of −118.87 (95% CI −161.03 to −76.71, I2 42%) g. A non‐significant risk change in birth height and head circumference was observed. In subgroup analysis, ASM polytherapy, within epilepsy and ASM class analysis were also associated with an increased risk of SGA and LBW. Conclusions: This meta‐analysis demonstrates that pregnant people exposed to ASMs have a significantly increased risk of adverse fetal growth outcomes including SGA and LBW and decreased birth weight compared to unexposed pregnant people. Polytherapy was associated with higher risks compared to monotherapy. Additional studies are warranted on specific ASM risks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To identify the risk factors for optic nerve hypoplasia (ONH) and septo‐optic dysplasia (SOD). Method: A retrospective, population‐based study with case–control design was undertaken using the Population Research Data Repository at the Manitoba Center for Health Policy in Manitoba, Canada. Cases were 111 patients (63 males, 48 females; age range 1–35 years [mean 11 years 6 months, SD 7 years 2 months]) with ONH and SOD diagnosed from 1990 to 2019, matched to 555 unrelated population‐based controls (315 males, 240 females; age range 1–35 years [mean 11 years 6 months, SD 7 years 2 months]) on year of birth, sex, and area of residence. Additionally, 75 cases (46 males, 29 females; age range 2–35 years [mean 12 years 6 months, SD 7 years 2 months]) with ONH and SOD were matched one‐on‐one with sibling controls (40 males, 35 females; age range 0–33 years [mean 11 years 7 months, SD 7 years 10 months], the rest did not have siblings). Several antenatal maternal risk factors associated with ONH and SOD were tested for their association with case and control group membership using adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) from a multivariate conditional logistic regression model. The outcome was the risk of developing ONH and SOD. Results: Maternal age at conception (OR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.86–0.96), primigravida (OR = 3.39, 95% CI = 1.92–6.01), and smoking (OR = 2.86, 95% CI = 1.61–5.05) were independently associated with ONH and SOD in the cohort matched to unrelated controls (p < 0.001). In the sibling cohort, smoking was an important risk factor (OR = 3.65, 95% CI = 1.2–11.1, p = 0.02). Interpretation: Unmodifiable and modifiable antenatal maternal risk factors are associated with ONH and SOD. Our investigation suggests that several risk factors reported in previous studies may have been due to confounding bias and that maternal smoking during pregnancy is the main modifiable risk factor associated with ONH and SOD. What this paper adds: Historically, many antenatal risk factors have been associated with optic nerve hypoplasia (ONH) and septo‐optic dysplasia (SOD).Population‐based data with matched controls for potential confounding bias are lacking.Young maternal age at conception, primigravida, and smoking during pregnancy are the main risk factors for ONH and SOD using a population‐based, case–control design. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective The late preterm population [34-36 weeks gestational age (GA)] is known to incur increased morbidity in the infancy stage compared to the population born at term (39-41 weeks GA). This study aimed to examine the health of these children during their early childhood years, with specific attention to the role of socioeconomic status. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy, including all live-born children born at 34-36 and 39-41 weeks GA in urban Manitoba between 2000 and 2005 (n = 28,100). Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association of GA with early childhood morbidity after controlling for maternal, child and family level variables. Results The late preterm population was found to have significantly greater adjusted odds of lower respiratory tract infections in the preschool years (aOR = 1.59 [1.24, 2.04]) and asthma at school age (aOR = 1.33 [1.18, 1.47]) compared to the population born at term. The groups also differed in health care utilization at ages 4 (aOR = 1.19 [1.06,1.34]) and 7 years (aOR = 1.24 [1.09, 1.42]). Additional variables associated with poor outcomes suggest that social deprivation and GA simultaneously have a negative impact on early childhood development. Conclusions for Practice Adjustment for predictors of poor early childhood development, including socioeconomic status, were found to attenuate but not eliminate health differences between children born late preterm and children born at term. Poorer health outcomes that extend into childhood have implications for practice at the population level and suggest a need for further follow-up post discharge., Author(s): Leah K. Crockett [sup.1] , Marni D. Brownell [sup.1] [sup.2] , Maureen I. Heaman [sup.2] [sup.3] , Chelsea A. Ruth [sup.2] [sup.4] , Heather J. Prior [sup.2] Author Affiliations: [...]

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Psychiatry is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Objective: To study the association between prematurity and grade 3 school performance in a contemporary cohort of children.Methods: Population-based retrospective cohort study in Manitoba, Canada. Children born between 1999 and 2011 who had their grade 3 school performance data available were eligible. Preterm birth (<37 weeks) was the exposure of interest assessed using multivariable logistic regression models. Our primary outcomes were 'needs ongoing help' or 'outside the range' in at least two of each of the (1) four numeracy and (2) three reading competencies.Results: Of the 186 956 eligible children, 101 436 children (7187 preterm (gestational age, median (IQR) 35 weeks (34, 36)) and 94 249 term (40 weeks (39,40)) were included. Overall, 19% of preterm and 14% of term children had the numeracy outcome (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.38; 95% CI 1.29 to 1.47, p<0.001), while 19% and 13% had the reading outcome (aOR 1.38; 1.29 to 1.48, p<0.001). These differences showed a gestational age gradient. Gestational age (for numeracy, <28 weeks aOR 4.93 (3.45 to 7.03), 28-33 weeks 1.72 (1.50 to 1.98), 34-36 weeks 1.24 (1.15 to 1.34); for reading, <28 weeks 3.51 (2.40 to 5.14), 28-33 weeks 1.72 (1.49 to 1.98), 34-36 weeks 1.24 (1.17-1.37)), male sex, small for gestational age and maternal medical and sociodemographic factors were associated with the numeracy and reading outcomes in this cohort.Conclusions and Relevance: Children born preterm had poorer performance in grade 3 numeracy and reading proficiencies than children born full term. All children born preterm, not just those born extremely preterm, should be screened for reading and numeracy performance in school and strategies implemented to address any deficits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Infants born late preterm (34 + 0 to 36 + 6 weeks GA (gestational age)) are known to have higher neonatal morbidity than term (37 + 0 to 41 + 6 weeks GA) infants. There is emerging evidence that these risks may not be homogenous within the term cohort and may be higher in early term (37 + 0 to 38 + 6 weeks GA). These risks may also be affected by socioeconomic status, a risk factor for preterm birth. Methods A retrospective population based cohort of infants born at 34 to 41 weeks of GA was assembled; individual and area-level income was used to develop three socioeconomic (SES) groups. Neonatal morbidity was grouped into respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), other respiratory disorders, other complications of prematurity, admission to a Level II/III nursery and receipt of phototherapy. Regression models were constructed to examine the relationship of GA and SES to neonatal morbidity while controlling for other perinatal variables. Results The cohort contained 25 312 infants of whom 6.1% (n = 1524) were born preterm and 32.4% (n = 8203) were of low SES. Using 39/40 weeks GA as the reference group there was a decrease in neonatal morbidity at each week of gestation. The odds ratios remained significantly higher at 37 weeks for RDS or other respiratory disorders, and at 38 weeks for all other outcomes. SES had an independent effect, increasing morbidity with odds ratios ranging from 1.2–1.5 for all outcomes except for the RDS group, where it was not significant. Conclusions The risks of morbidity fell throughout late preterm and early term gestation for both respiratory and non-respiratory morbidity. Low SES was associated with an independent increased risk. Recognition that the morbidities associated with prematurity continue into early term gestation and are further compounded by SES is important to develop strategies for improving care of early term infants, avoiding iatrogenic complications and prioritizing public health interventions.

Introduction: Antidepressants are commonly prescribed during pregnancy; however, there are inconsistent data on the safety of these medications during the prenatal period. To address this gap, this study will investigate short-term and long-term neurodevelopmental, physical and mental health, and educational outcomes of children who have been exposed to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) or selective serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) and/or maternal depression during pregnancy. Methods and analysis: Administrative data will be linked to generate 4 population-based exposed groups from all children born in Manitoba between 1996 and 2014 whose mother had at least 2 prescriptions for either an SSRI or SNRI: (1) throughout the prenatal period (beginning of pregnancy until birth); (2) in the first trimester (≤14 weeks gestation); (3) in the second trimester (15-26 weeks gestation); (4) in the third trimester (≥27 weeks gestation) and 1 populationbased unexposed group consisting of children whose mothers had a diagnosis of mood or anxiety disorder during pregnancy but did not use antidepressants. Propensity scores and inverse probability treatment weights will be used to adjust for confounding. Multivariate regression modelling will determine whether, compared with untreated mood/anxiety disorder, prenatal exposure to antidepressant medications is associated with: (1) adverse birth and neonatal outcomes, including: preterm birth, low birth weight, low Apgar scores, respiratory distress, congenital malformations and persistent pulmonary hypertension; (2) adverse early childhood outcomes, including: early childhood education challenges, diagnosis of neurodevelopmental disorders and diagnosis of mental disorders. We will determine if exposure effects differ between SSRIs and SRNIs, and determine if exposure effects differ between gestation timing of exposure to antidepressants. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval was obtained from the University of Manitoba Health Research Ethics Board. Dissemination of results will include engagement of stakeholders and patients, writing of reports for policymakers and patients, and publication of scientific papers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]