Search

Healthy pregnancies are fundamental to healthy populations, but very few therapies to improve pregnancy outcomes are available. Fundamental concepts—for example, placentation or the mechanisms that control the onset of labor—remain understudied and incompletely understood. A key issue is that research efforts must capture the complexity of the tripartite maternal-placental-fetal system, the dynamics of which change throughout gestation. Studying pregnancy disorders is complicated by the difficulty of creating maternal-placental-fetal interfaces in vitro and the uncertain relevance of animal models to human pregnancy. However, newer approaches include trophoblast organoids to model the developing placenta and integrated data-science approaches to study longer-term outcomes. These approaches provide insights into the physiology of healthy pregnancy, which is the first step to identifying therapeutic targets in pregnancy disorders.

Preterm birth (PTB) is the leading cause of infant mortality worldwide. Changes in PTB rates, ranging from −90% to +30%, were reported in many countries following early COVID-19 pandemic response measures (‘lockdowns’). It is unclear whether this variation reflects real differences in lockdown impacts, or perhaps differences in stillbirth rates and/or study designs. Here we present interrupted time series and meta-analyses using harmonized data from 52 million births in 26 countries, 18 of which had representative population-based data, with overall PTB rates ranging from 6% to 12% and stillbirth ranging from 2.5 to 10.5 per 1,000 births. We show small reductions in PTB in the first (odds ratio 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.95–0.98, P value

IntroductionDespite recommendation that all women receive an ultrasound in pregnancy prior to 24 weeks', this remains unavailable to many women in low-income countries where trained practitioners are scarce. Although many programmes have demonstrated efficacy, few have achieved longterm sustainability, with a lack of information about how best to implement such programmes. This mixed-methods study aimed to evaluate the implementation of a novel education package to teach ultrasound-naive midwives in Malawi basic obstetric ultrasound, assessing its impact in the context of the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework.MethodsThe study ran across six sites in Malawi between October 2020 and June 2021, encompassing three phases; pre-implementation, implementation and post-implementation. Twenty nine midwives underwent a bespoke education package with matched pre and post course surveys assessed their knowledge, attitudes and confidence and “hands on” assessments evaluating practical skills. Training evaluation forms and in-depth interviews explored their satisfaction with the package, with repeat assessment and remote image review evaluating maintenance of skills.Results28/29 midwives completed the training, with significant increases in knowledge, confidence and practical skills. Adherence to the education package varied, however many changes to the proposed methodology were adaptive and appeared to facilitate the efficacy of the programme. Unfortunately, despite reporting approval regarding the training itself, satisfaction regarding supervision and follow up was mixed, reflecting the difficulties encountered with providing ongoing in-person and remote support.ConclusionThis programme was successful in improving trainees' knowledge, confidence and skill in performing basic obstetric ultrasound, largely on account of an adaptive approach to implementation. The maintenance of ongoing support was challenging, reflected by trainee dissatisfaction. By evaluating the success of this education package based on its implementation and not just its efficacy, we have generated new insights into the barriers to sustainable upscale, specifically those surrounding maintenance.

Funding: BREATHE - The Health Data Research Hub for Respiratory Health, which is funded through the UK Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund and delivered through Health Data Research UK (MC_PC_19004); CSO Rapid Research in Covid-19 Programme (COV/SAN/20/06); HDR UK Measuring and Understanding Multi-morbidity using Routine Data in the UK (MurMuRUK) (HDR-9006-9006; CFC0110); Medical Research Council (MR/R008345/1). Objectives We investigated the association between multimorbidity among patients hospitalised with COVID-19 and their subsequent risk of mortality. We also explored the interaction between the presence of multimorbidity and the requirement for an individual to shield due to the presence of specific conditions and its association with mortality. Design We created a cohort of patients hospitalised in Scotland due to COVID-19 during the first wave (between 28 February 2020 and 22 September 2020) of the pandemic. We identified the level of multimorbidity for the patient on admission and used logistic regression to analyse the association between multimorbidity and risk of mortality among patients hospitalised with COVID-19. Setting Scotland, UK. Participants Patients hospitalised due to COVID-19. Main outcome measures Mortality as recorded on National Records of Scotland death certificate and being coded for COVID-19 on the death certificate or death within 28 days of a positive COVID-19 test. Results Almost 58% of patients admitted to the hospital due to COVID-19 had multimorbidity. Adjusting for confounding factors of age, sex, social class and presence in the shielding group, multimorbidity was significantly associated with mortality (adjusted odds ratio 1.48, 95%CI 1.26–1.75). The presence of multimorbidity and presence in the shielding patients list were independently associated with mortality but there was no multiplicative effect of having both (adjusted odds ratio 0.91, 95%CI 0.64–1.29). Conclusions Multimorbidity is an independent risk factor of mortality among individuals who were hospitalised due to COVID-19. Individuals with multimorbidity could be prioritised when making preventive policies, for example, by expanding shielding advice to this group and prioritising them for vaccination. Publisher PDF

The use of ultrasound to determine gestational age is fundamental to the optimum management of pregnancy and is recommended for all women by the World Health Organization. However, this modality remains unavailable to many women in low-income countries where trained practitioners are scarce. Although previous initiatives have demonstrated efficacy in training midwives and technicians to perform antenatal ultrasound, these programs have often been too long and too complex to be realistic within the specific constraints of this context, highlighting the need for a novel and pragmatic approach. We describe the development and piloting of a bespoke course to teach midwives 3 fundamental components of early antenatal ultrasound scanning: (1) to identify the number of fetuses, (2) to confirm fetal viability, and (3) to determine gestational age. Having established that 5 days is insufficient, we propose that the minimum duration required to train ultrasound-naive midwives to competency is 10 days. Our completed program therefore consists of one and one-half days of didactic teaching, followed by 8 and one-half days of supervised hands-on practical training in which trainees are assessed on their skills. This package has subsequently been successfully implemented across 6 sites in Malawi, where 28 midwives have achieved competency. By describing the processes involved in our cross-continental collaboration, we explain how unexpected challenges helped shape and improve our program, demonstrating the value of preimplementation piloting and a pragmatic and adaptive approach.

The late gestational rise in glucocorticoids contributes to the structural and functional maturation of the perinatal heart. Here, we hypothesized that glucocorticoid action contributes to the metabolic switch in perinatal cardiomyocytes from carbohydrate to fatty acid oxidation. In primary mouse fetal cardiomyocytes, dexamethasone treatment induced expression of genes involved in fatty acid oxidation and increased mitochondrial oxidation of palmitate, dependent upon a glucocorticoid receptor (GR). Dexamethasone did not, however, induce mitophagy or alter the morphology of the mitochondrial network. In vivo, in neonatal mice, dexamethasone treatment induced cardiac expression of fatty acid oxidation genes. However, dexamethasone treatment of pregnant C57Bl/6 mice at embryonic day (E)13.5 or E16.5 failed to induce fatty acid oxidation genes in fetal hearts assessed 24 h later. Instead, at E17.5, fatty acid oxidation genes were downregulated by dexamethasone, as was GR itself. PGC-1α, required for glucocorticoid-induced maturation of primary mouse fetal cardiomyocytes in vitro, was also downregulated in fetal hearts at E17.5, 24 h after dexamethasone administration. Similarly, following a course of antenatal corticosteroids in a translational sheep model of preterm birth, both GR and PGC-1α were downregulated in heart. These data suggest that endogenous glucocorticoids support the perinatal switch to fatty acid oxidation in cardiomyocytes through changes in gene expression rather than gross changes in mitochondrial volume or mitochondrial turnover. Moreover, our data suggest that treatment with exogenous glucocorticoids may interfere with normal fetal heart maturation, possibly by downregulating GR. This has implications for clinical use of antenatal corticosteroids when preterm birth is considered a possibility. Key points: Glucocorticoids are steroid hormones that play a vital role in late pregnancy in maturing fetal organs, including the heart. In fetal cardiomyocytes in culture, glucocorticoids promote mitochondrial fatty acid oxidation, suggesting they facilitate the perinatal switch from carbohydrates to fatty acids as the predominant energy substrate. Administration of a synthetic glucocorticoid in late pregnancy in mice downregulates the glucocorticoid receptor and interferes with the normal increase in genes involved in fatty acid metabolism in the heart. In a sheep model of preterm birth, antenatal corticosteroids (synthetic glucocorticoid) downregulates the glucocorticoid receptor and the gene encoding PGC-1α, a master regulator of energy metabolism. These experiments suggest that administration of antenatal corticosteroids in anticipation of preterm delivery may interfere with fetal heart maturation by downregulating the ability to respond to glucocorticoids.

For women with a singleton or a multiple pregnancy in situations where active neonatal care is appropriate, and for whom preterm birth is anticipated between 24 and 34 weeks of gestation, one course of prenatal corticosteroids should ideally be offered 18 to 72 h before preterm birth is expected to improve outcomes for the baby. However, if preterm birth is expected within 18 h, prenatal corticosteroids should still be administered. One course of corticosteroids includes two doses of betamethasone acetate/phosphate 12 mg IM 24 h apart, or two doses of dexamethasone phosphate 12 mg IM 24 h apart. In women in whom preterm birth is expected within 72 h and who have had one course of corticosteroids more than a week previously, one single additional course of prenatal corticosteroids could be given at risk of imminent delivery. Prenatal corticosteroids should not be offered routinely to women in whom late preterm birth between 34 and 36 weeks is anticipated. In addition, prenatal corticosteroids should not be given routinely before cesarean delivery at term. Neither should prenatal corticosteroids be given "just in case". Instead, prenatal steroid administration should be reserved for women for whom preterm birth is expected within no more than 7 days, based on the woman's symptoms or an accurate predictive test.

Background Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has challenged public health agencies globally. In order to effectively target government responses, it is critical to identify the individuals most at risk of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19), developing severe clinical signs, and mortality. We undertook a systematic review of the literature to present the current status of scientific knowledge in these areas and describe the need for unified global approaches, moving forwards, as well as lessons learnt for future pandemics. Methods Medline, Embase and Global Health were searched to the end of April 2020, as well as the Web of Science. Search terms were specific to the SARS-CoV-2 virus and COVID-19. Comparative studies of risk factors from any setting, population group and in any language were included. Titles, abstracts and full texts were screened by two reviewers and extracted in duplicate into a standardised form. Data were extracted on risk factors for COVID-19 disease, severe disease, or death and were narratively and descriptively synthesised. Results One thousand two hundred and thirty-eight papers were identified post-deduplication. Thirty-three met our inclusion criteria, of which 26 were from China. Six assessed the risk of contracting the disease, 20 the risk of having severe disease and ten the risk of dying. Age, gender and co-morbidities were commonly assessed as risk factors. The weight of evidence showed increasing age to be associated with severe disease and mortality, and general comorbidities with mortality. Only seven studies presented multivariable analyses and power was generally limited. A wide range of definitions were used for disease severity. Conclusions The volume of literature generated in the short time since the appearance of SARS-CoV-2 has been considerable. Many studies have sought to document the risk factors for COVID-19 disease, disease severity and mortality; age was the only risk factor based on robust studies and with a consistent body of evidence. Mechanistic studies are required to understand why age is such an important risk factor. At the start of pandemics, large, standardised, studies that use multivariable analyses are urgently needed so that the populations most at risk can be rapidly protected. Registration This review was registered on PROSPERO as CRD42020177714.

Funding: COPS is a sub-study of EAVE II, which is funded by the Medical Research Council (MR/R008345/1) with the support of BREATHE - The Health Data Research Hub for Respiratory Health [MC_PC_19004], which is funded through the UK Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund and delivered through Health Data Research UK. Additional support has been provided through Public Health Scotland and Scottish Government DG Health and Social Care and the Data and Connectivity National Core Study, led by Health Data Research UK in partnership with the Office for National Statistics and funded by UK Research and Innovation. COPS has received additional funding from Tommy’s charity. SJS is funded by a Wellcome Trust Clinical Career Development Fellowship (209560/Z/17/Z). SVK acknowledges funding from a NRS Senior Clinical Fellowship (SCAF/15/02), the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00022/2) and the Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office (SPHSU17). Background Evidence suggests that the SARS-CoV-2 omicron (B.1·1.529) is associated with lower risks of adverse outcomes than the delta (B.1.617.2) variant among the general population. However, little is known about outcomes after omicron infection in pregnancy. We aimed to assess and compare short-term pregnancy outcomes after SARS-CoV-2 delta and omicron infection in pregnancy. Methods We did a national population-based cohort study of women who had SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy between May 17, 2021, and Jan 31, 2022. The primary maternal outcome was admission to critical care within 21 days of infection or death within 28 days of date of infection. Pregnancy outcomes were preterm birth and stillbirth within 28 days of infection. Neonatal outcomes were death within 28 days of birth, and low Apgar score (

Study protocol for the paper "Pregnancy outcomes following delta and omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection in Scotland: a population-based cohort study". Background:We aimed to assess and compare short term pregnancy outcomes following SARS-CoV-2 omicron (B.1.1.529) and delta (B.1.617.2) variant infection in pregnancy. Methods:We conducted a national population-based cohort study of women who had SARS-CoV-2 in pregnancy between May 17,2021 and January 31, 2022. Outcomes were maternal critical care admissioni) within 21 days of infection and ii) for COVID-19; and preterm birth (

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This analysis is part of the Early Pandemic Evaluation and Enhanced Surveillance of COVID-19 (EAVE II) study. EAVE II is funded by the Medical Research Council (MR/R008345/1) with the support of BREATHE – The Health Data Research Hub for Respiratory Health (MC_PC_19004), which is funded through the UK Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund and delivered through Health Data Research UK. Additional support has been provided through the Scottish Government DG Health and Social Care. SAS and AS are also supported by the COVID-19 Longitudinal Health and Wellbeing National Core Study, funded by the Medical Research Council (MC_PC_20030). SVK acknowledges funding from a NRS Senior Clinical Fellowship (SCAF/15/02), the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00022/2) and the Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office (SPHSU17). JM is partly funded by the National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West). Objectives COVID-19 has resulted in the greatest disruption to National Health Service (NHS) care in its over 70-year history. Building on our previous work, we assessed the ongoing impact of pandemic-related disruption on provision of emergency and elective hospital-based care across Scotland over the first year of the pandemic. Design We undertook interrupted time-series analyses to evaluate the impact of ongoing pandemic-related disruption on hospital NHS care provision at national level and across demographics and clinical specialties spanning the period 29 March 2020?28 March 2021. Setting Scotland, UK. Participants Patients receiving hospital care from NHS Scotland. Main outcome measures We used the percentage change of accident and emergency attendances, and emergency and planned hospital admissions during the pandemic compared to the average admission rate for equivalent weeks in 2018-2019. Results As restrictions were gradually lifted in Scotland after the first lockdown, hospital-based admissions increased approaching pre-pandemic levels. Subsequent tightening of restrictions in September 2020 were associated with a change in slope of relative weekly admissions rate: -1.98% (-2.38, -1.58) in accident and emergency attendance, -1.36% (-1.68, -1.04) in emergency admissions and -2.31% (-2.95, -1.66) in planned admissions. A similar pattern was seen across sex, socioeconomic status and most age groups, except children (0-14 years) where accident and emergency attendance, and emergency admissions were persistently low over the study period. Conclusions We found substantial disruption to urgent and planned inpatient healthcare provision in hospitals across NHS Scotland. There is the need for urgent policy responses to address continuing unmet health needs and to ensure resilience in the context of future pandemics. Publisher PDF

Funding: EAVE II is funded by the Medical Research Council (MR/R008345/1) with the support of BREATHE - The Health Data Research Hub for Respiratory Health [MC_PC_19004], which is funded through the UK Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund and delivered through Health Data Research UK. Additional support has been provided through Public Health Scotland and Scottish Government DG Health and Social Care and the Data and Connectivity National Core Study, led by Health Data Research UK in partnership with the Office for National Statistics and funded by UK Research and Innovation. SVK is funded by a NHS Research Scotland Senior Clinical Fellowship (SCAF/15/02), the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00022/2), and the Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office (SPHSU17).

Objectives Following the outbreak of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus and the subsequent global spread of the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), health systems and the populations who use them have faced unprecedented challenges. We aimed to measure the impact of COVID-19 on the uptake of hospital-based care at a national level. Design The study period (weeks ending 5 January to 28 June 2020) encompassed the pandemic announcement by the World Health Organization and the initiation of the UK lockdown. We undertook an interrupted time-series analysis to evaluate the impact of these events on hospital services at a national level and across demographics, clinical specialties and National Health Service Health Boards. Setting Scotland, UK. Participants Patients receiving hospital care from National Health Service Scotland. Main outcome measures Accident and emergency (A&E) attendances, and emergency and planned hospital admissions measured using the relative change of weekly counts in 2020 to the averaged counts for equivalent weeks in 2018 and 2019. Results Before the pandemic announcement, the uptake of hospital care was largely consistent with historical levels. This was followed by sharp drops in all outcomes until UK lockdown, where activity began to steadily increase. This time-period saw an average reduction of −40.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: −47.7 to −33.7) in A&E attendances, −25.8% (95% CI: −31.1 to −20.4) in emergency hospital admissions and −60.9% (95% CI: −66.1 to −55.7) in planned hospital admissions, in comparison to the 2018–2019 averages. All subgroup trends were broadly consistent within outcomes, but with notable variations across age groups, specialties and geography. Conclusions COVID-19 has had a profoundly disruptive impact on hospital-based care across National Health Service Scotland. This has likely led to an adverse effect on non-COVID-19-related illnesses, increasing the possibility of potentially avoidable morbidity and mortality. Further research is required to elucidate these impacts.

In the version of this article initially published, a Statistical Analysis subsection was not present in the Methods and has now been included. Further, the Data availability statement has been amended to clarify that patient-level data may be available to approved researchers after securing relevant permissions from Public Health Scotland via the Public Benefit and Privacy Panel. The changes have been made to the online version of the article.

Funding: EAVE II is funded by the Medical Research Council (MR/R008345/1) with the support of BREATHE—the Health Data Research Hub for Respiratory Health [MC_PC_19004] which is funded through the UK Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund and delivered through Health Data Research UK. Additional EAVE II support has been provided through the Scottish Government DG Health and Social Care. COPS receive additional funding from Tommy’s Charity (Charity number 1060508; SC039280) and is supported by Sands (Charity number 299679). S.J.S. is supported by the Wellcome Trust (209560/Z/17/Z). S.V.K. acknowledges funding from an NRS Senior Clinical Fellowship (SCAF/15/02), the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00022/2) and the Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office (SPHSU17). B.A. was supported by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No.813546, the Baily Thomas Charitable Fund, the Data Driven Innovation and the UK Economic and Social Research Council (ES/N018877/1) during the course of this work. Publisher PDF

Funding: This research is part of the Data and Connectivity National Core Study, led by Health Data Research UK in partnership with the Office for National Statistics and funded by UK Research and Innovation (grant ref MC_PC_20058). SVK acknowledges funding from a NRS Senior Clinical Fellowship (SCAF/15/02), the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00022/2) and the Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office (SPHSU17). Background The dynamics of acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission and severity of disease among children and young people (CYP) across different settings are of considerable clinical, public health and societal interest. Severe COVID-19 cases, requiring hospitalisations, and deaths have been reported in some CYP suggesting a need to extend vaccinations to these age groups. As part of the ongoing Early Pandemic Evaluation and Enhanced Surveillance of COVID-19 (EAVE II) study, we aim to investigate the uptake, effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in children and young people (CYP) aged 0 to 17 years in Scotland. Specifically, we will estimate: (i) uptake of vaccines against COVID-19, (ii) vaccine effectiveness (VE) against the outcomes of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalisation, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, and death; (iii) VE for first/second dose timing among different age groups and risk groups; and (iv) the safety of vaccines. Methods and analysis We will conduct an open prospective cohort study classifying exposure as time-varying. We will compare outcomes amongst first dose vaccinated and second dose vaccinated CYP to those not yet vaccinated. A Test Negative Design (TND) case control study will be nested within this national cohort to investigate VE against symptomatic infection. The primary outcomes will be (i) uptake of vaccines against COVID-19, (ii) time to COVID-19 infection, hospitalisation, ICU admissions or death, and (iii) adverse events related to vaccines. Vaccination status (unvaccinated, one dose and two doses) will be defined as a time-varying exposure. Data from multiple sources will be linked using a unique identifier. We will conduct descriptive analyses to explore trends in vaccine uptake, and association between different exposure variables and vaccine uptake will be determined using multivariable logistic regression models. VE will be assessed from time-dependent Cox models or Poisson regression models, adjusted for relevant confounders, including age, sex, socioeconomic status, and comorbidities. We will employ self-controlled study designs to determine the risk of adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination. Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval was obtained from the National Research Ethics Committee, South East Scotland 02. We will present findings of this study at international conferences, in peer-reviewed journals and to policy-makers. Publisher PDF

We describe SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccine uptake in Scotland in a prospective cohort of all pregnant women in Scotland drawn from national databases. As of mid-October 2021, the Covid-19 in pregnancy in Scotland (COPS) cohort included linked data on a total of 139,136 pregnancies in 126,749 women. Up to September 30, 2021, a total of 22,779 COVID-19 vaccinations had been administered to 16,229 pregnant women. Vaccine coverage was substantially lower in pregnant women than in the general female population of reproductive age (23.7% of women giving birth in September 2021 were fully vaccinated compared to 74.9 % in women 18-44 years). Of the 4,274 cases of COVID-19 in pregnancy (confirmed by SARS-CoV-2 viral reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction) between December 2020 (the month the COVID-19 vaccination programme started in Scotland) and September 2021 inclusive, 629 women (14.7%) were admitted to hospital and 89 (2.1%) were admitted to critical care. Of the COVID-19 cases occurring in pregnant women, 81.7% (3,491/4,274; 95% CI 80.5-82.8) were in unvaccinated women. Of the COVID-19 associated hospital admissions, 93.0% (585/629; 95% CI 90.7-94.8) were in women who were unvaccinated at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis. Of the COVID-19 associated critical care admissions 98.9% (88/89; 95% CI 93.9-100) were in women who were unvaccinated at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis. The extended perinatal mortality rate for women who gave birth within 28 days of COVID-19 diagnosis was 15.9 per 1000 births (95% CI 7.8 to 31.0; background rate in 2020 6.3 per 1,000 total births [95% CI 5.7-7.1]; background rate 2019 5.7 per 1,000 total births [95% CI 5.0-6.4]). All baby deaths occurred after pregnancies in women who were unvaccinated at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis. Addressing low vaccine uptake rates in pregnant women is imperative to protect the health of women and babies.

Background Around 60,000 babies are born preterm (prior to 37 weeks’ gestation) each year in the UK. There is little evidence on the optimal birth mode (vaginal or caesarean section). Objective The overall aim of the CASSAVA project was to determine if a trial to define the optimal mode of preterm birth could be carried out and, if so, determine what sort of trial could be conducted and how it could best be performed. We aimed to determine the specific groups of preterm women and babies for whom there are uncertainties about the best planned mode of birth, and if there would be willingness to recruit to, and participate in, a randomised trial to address some, but not all, of these uncertainties. This project was conducted in response to a Heath Technology Assessment programme commissioning call (17/22 ‘Mode of delivery for preterm infants’). Methods We conducted clinician and patient surveys (n = 224 and n = 379, respectively) to identify current practice and opinion, and a consensus survey and Delphi workshop (n = 76 and n = 22 participants, respectively) to inform the design of a hypothetical clinical trial. The protocol for this clinical trial/vignette was used in telephone interviews with clinicians (n = 24) and in focus groups with potential participants (n = 13). Results Planned sample size and data saturation was achieved for all groups except for focus groups with participants, as this had to be curtailed because of the COVID-19 pandemic and data saturation was not achieved. There was broad agreement from parents and health-care professionals that a trial is needed. The clinician survey demonstrated a variety of practice and opinion. The parent survey suggested that women and their families generally preferred vaginal birth at later gestations and caesarean section for preterm infants. The interactive workshop and Delphi consensus process confirmed the need for more evidence (hence the case for a trial) and provided rich information on what a future trial should entail. It was agreed that any trial should address the areas with most uncertainty, including the management of women at 26–32 weeks’ gestation, with either spontaneous preterm labour (cephalic presentation) or where preterm birth was medically indicated. Clear themes around the challenges inherent in conducting any trial emerged, including the concept of equipoise itself. Specific issues were as follows: different clinicians and participants would be in equipoise for each clinical scenario, effective conduct of the trial would require appropriate resources and expertise within the hospital conducting the trial, potential participants would welcome information on the trial well before the onset of labour and minority ethnic groups would require tailored approaches. Conclusion Given the lack of evidence and the variation of practice and opinion in this area, and having listened to clinicians and potential participants, we conclude that a trial should be conducted and the outlined challenges resolved. Future work The CASSAVA project could be used to inform the design of a randomised trial and indicates how such a trial could be carried out. Any future trial would benefit from a pilot with qualitative input and a study within a trial to inform optimal recruitment. Limitations Certainty that a trial could be conducted can be determined only when it is attempted. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN12295730. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 61. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Background: In 2016 the Antenatal Late Preterm Steroids study was published, demonstrating that antenatal corticosteroid therapy given to women at risk of late preterm delivery reduces respiratory morbidity in infants. However, the administration of antenatal corticosteroid therapy in late-preterm infants remains controversial. Late-preterm infants do not suffer from the same rates of morbidity as early-preterm infants, and the short-term benefits of antenatal corticosteroid therapy are less pronounced; consequently, the risk of possible harm is more difficult to balance. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the association between the publication of the Antenatal Late Preterm Steroids study or the subsequent changes in guidelines and the rates of antenatal corticosteroid therapy administration in late-preterm infants in the United States. Study Design: Data analyzed were publicly available US birth certificate data from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2018. An interrupted time series design was used to analyze the association between publication of the Antenatal Late Preterm Steroids study and changes in monthly rates of antenatal corticosteroid administration in late preterm gestation (34+0 to 36+6 weeks). Births at 28+0 to 31+6 weeks’ gestation were used as a control. Antenatal corticosteroid therapy administration in women with births at 32+0 to 34+6 weeks was explored to analyze whether the intervention influenced antenatal corticosteroid therapy administration in women in the subgroup approaching 34 weeks’ gestation. Antenatal corticosteroid therapy administration in women with term births (>37 weeks’ gestation) was analyzed to explore if the intervention influenced the number of term babies exposed to antenatal corticosteroid therapy. Our regression model allowed analysis of both step and slope changes. February 2016 was chosen as the intervention period. Results: Our sample size was 18,031,950 total births. Of these, 1,056,047 were births at 34+0 to 36+6 weeks’ gestation, 123,788 at 28+0 to 31+6 weeks, 153,708 at 32 to 33 weeks, and 16,602,699 were term births. There were 95,708 births at