Risk perception and affective state on work exhaustion in obstetrics during the COVID-19 pandemic

A multicenter cross-sectional survey study involving four Italian University Hospitals was performed to test the hypothesis that negative affect and positive affect (affective dimensions) mediate the association between risk perception (perceived risk of infection and death;cognitive dimensions) and the feeling of work exhaustion (WE) among obstetrics healthcare providers (HCPs) during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Totally, 570 obstetrics HCPs were invited to complete the 104-item IPSICO survey in May 2020. A theoretical model built on the tested hypothesis was investigated by structural equation modelling. The model explained 32.2% of the WE variance. Only negative affect mediated the association between cognitive dimensions and WE and also the association between WE and psychological well-being before the pandemic, experiences of stressful events, female gender, and dysfunctional coping. Non-mediated associations with WE were observed for work perceived as a duty, experience of stressful events, support received by colleagues, and the shift strategy. Only previous psychological well-being, support by colleagues, and shift strategies were inversely associated with WE. Based on study results, monitoring negative than positive affect appears superior in predicting WE, with practical implications for planning psychological interventions in HCPs at the individual, interpersonal, and organizational levels.

Evaluation of menstrual irregularities after COVID-19 vaccination: Results of the MECOVAC survey.

We investigated menstrual irregularities after the first and second doses of the COVID-19 vaccine. Women answered a customised online questionnaire (ClinicalTrial.gov ID: NCT05083065) aimed to assess the vaccine type, the phase of the menstrual cycle during which the vaccine was administered, the occurrence of menstrual irregularities after the first and second doses, and how long this effect lasted. We excluded women with gynaecological and non-gynaecological diseases, undergoing hormonal and non-hormonal treatments, in perimenopause or menopause, as well as those who had irregular menstrual cycles in the last 12 months before vaccine administration. According to our data analysis, approximately 50-60% of reproductive-age women who received the first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine reported menstrual cycle irregularities, regardless of the type of administered vaccine. The occurrence of menstrual irregularities seems to be slightly higher (60-70%) after the second dose. Menstrual irregularities after both the first and second doses of the vaccine were found to self-resolve in approximately half the cases within two months. Based on these results, we suggest to consider these elements during the counselling of women who receive the COVID-19 vaccine, letting them know about the potential occurrence of temporary and self-limiting menstrual cycle irregularities in the subsequent month(s).

Practice changes in Italian Gynaecologic Units during the COVID-19 pandemic: a survey study.

The impact of Coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on Italian Gynaecological Units practice and the compliance and satisfaction with available guidelines/recommendations is unknown. Therefore, a survey was conducted among all Italian Gynaecological Units Directors in April 2020. The response rate was 90% (135/150). 77.8% of centres performed surgery only for oncologic or not deferrable pathologies, and 9.6% was closed. 68.7% of directors were at least moderately satisfied by published guidelines/recommendations, but 94.8% of respondents identified limitations, mainly (83%) the absent definition of benign non-deferrable pathology. Responders considered as non-deferrable severe endometriosis (69.6%), endometriosis with organ failure/dysfunction (74.1%), and unresponsive symptomatic fibroids (89.6%). Despite guidelines/recommendations, respondents treated ovarian (77%) and endometrial (71.6%) cancer as usual. Only a minority of respondents reduced the laparoscopic approach (11.2%) and adopted all recommended surgical precautions (9.6%). Compliance with available guidelines/recommendations appears incomplete. Reconsidering guidelines/recommendations regarding oncological cases and specify non-deferrable benign pathologies would improve guidelines/recommendations compliance.Impact statementWhat is already known on this subject? The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has profoundly influenced medical routine practice worldwide. Surgery units have been forced to reduce or even completely restrict their activity to re-allocate human resources. Many major international gynaecological societies have released statements and guidelines, providing various recommendations to guide practice changes. However, the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on Italian Gynaecological Units practice and the compliance and satisfaction with available guidelines/recommendations is unknown.What do the results of this study add? Study results provide evidence showing how the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has changed surgical activity in the Italian Gynaecological Units. Most centres reduced surgical activity, limiting surgery only for oncologic or not deferrable pathologies. Moreover, our research shows the level of compliance and satisfaction with available guidelines/recommendations and where they need to be improved. Most directors were at least moderately satisfied but identified different limitations. Guidelines/recommendations do not provide enough details, such as the absent definition of benign non-deferrable pathologies.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? The limited compliance with available guidelines/recommendations and identified limitations suggest reconsidering guidelines/recommendations focussing on identified gaps. Provide more details, such as specifying non-deferrable benign pathologies, would improve guidelines/recommendations compliance.

The Psychological Impact of COVID-19 on Healthcare Providers in Obstetrics: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study.

Objective: To assess the psychological distress of healthcare providers (HCPs) working in the field of obstetrics during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and to identify factors associated with psychological distress at the individual, interpersonal, and organizational level. Design: Cross-sectional survey study. Setting: Four University hospitals in Italy. Participants: HCPs working in obstetrics, including gynecologists, residents in gynecology and obstetrics, and midwives. Methods: The 104-item survey Impatto PSIcologico COVID-19 in Ostetricia (IPSICO) was created by a multidisciplinary expert panel and administered to HCPs in obstetrics in May 2020 via a web-based platform. Main Outcome Measures: Psychological distress assessed by the General Health Questionnaire-12 (GHQ-12) included in the IPSICO survey. Results: The response rate to the IPSICO survey was 88.2% (503/570), and that for GHQ-12 was 84.4% (481/570). Just over half (51.1%; 246/481) of the GHQ-12 respondents reported a clinically significant level of psychological distress (GHQ-12 ≥3). Psychological distress was associated with either individual (i.e., female gender, stressful experience related to COVID-19, exhaustion, and the use of dysfunctional coping strategies), interpersonal (i.e., lower family support, limitations in interactions with colleagues), and organizational (i.e., reduced perception of protection by personal protective equipment, perceived delays on updates and gaps in information on the pandemic) factors in dealing with the pandemic. Conclusions: Results confirm the need for monitoring and assessing the psychological distress for HCPs in obstetrics. Interventions at the individual, interpersonal, and organizational level may relieve the psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic and foster resilience skills in facing emotional distress.

Risk factors associated with adverse fetal outcomes in pregnancies affected by Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a secondary analysis of the WAPM study on COVID-19.

Objectives To evaluate the strength of association between maternal and pregnancy characteristics and the risk of adverse perinatal outcomes in pregnancies with laboratory confirmed COVID-19. Methods Secondary analysis of a multinational, cohort study on all consecutive pregnant women with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 from February 1, 2020 to April 30, 2020 from 73 centers from 22 different countries. A confirmed case of COVID-19 was defined as a positive result on real-time reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) assay of nasal and pharyngeal swab specimens. The primary outcome was a composite adverse fetal outcome, defined as the presence of either abortion (pregnancy loss before 22 weeks of gestations), stillbirth (intrauterine fetal death after 22 weeks of gestation), neonatal death (death of a live-born infant within the first 28 days of life), and perinatal death (either stillbirth or neonatal death). Logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate parameters independently associated with the primary outcome. Logistic regression was reported as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Results Mean gestational age at diagnosis was 30.6±9.5 weeks, with 8.0% of women being diagnosed in the first, 22.2% in the second and 69.8% in the third trimester of pregnancy. There were six miscarriage (2.3%), six intrauterine device (IUD) (2.3) and 5 (2.0%) neonatal deaths, with an overall rate of perinatal death of 4.2% (11/265), thus resulting into 17 cases experiencing and 226 not experiencing composite adverse fetal outcome. Neither stillbirths nor neonatal deaths had congenital anomalies found at antenatal or postnatal evaluation. Furthermore, none of the cases experiencing IUD had signs of impending demise at arterial or venous Doppler. Neonatal deaths were all considered as prematurity-related adverse events. Of the 250 live-born neonates, one (0.4%) was found positive at RT-PCR pharyngeal swabs performed after delivery. The mother was tested positive during the third trimester of pregnancy. The newborn was asymptomatic and had negative RT-PCR test after 14 days of life. At logistic regression analysis, gestational age at diagnosis (OR: 0.85, 95% CI 0.8-0.9 per week increase; p<0.001), birthweight (OR: 1.17, 95% CI 1.09-1.12.7 per 100 g decrease; p=0.012) and maternal ventilatory support, including either need for oxygen or CPAP (OR: 4.12, 95% CI 2.3-7.9; p=0.001) were independently associated with composite adverse fetal outcome. Conclusions Early gestational age at infection, maternal ventilatory supports and low birthweight are the main determinants of adverse perinatal outcomes in fetuses with maternal COVID-19 infection. Conversely, the risk of vertical transmission seems negligible.