Pregnancy Intention, Changes in Pregnancy Intention, and Pregnancy Incidence Among Female Nurses in North America.

Importance: Pregnancy intention assessment is a key element of preconception and contraceptive care. The association between a single screening question and the incidence of pregnancy is unknown. Objective: To prospectively evaluate the dynamics of pregnancy intention and pregnancy incidence. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study (the Nurses' Health Study 3) was conducted from June 1, 2010, to April 1, 2022, in 18 376 premenopausal, nonpregnant female nurses aged 19 to 44 years. Main Outcomes and Measures: Pregnancy intention and pregnancy status were assessed at baseline and approximately every 3 to 6 months thereafter. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate the association between pregnancy intention and pregnancy incidence. Results: A total of 18 376 premenopausal, nonpregnant women (mean [SD] age, 32.4 [6.5] years) participated in the study. At baseline, 1008 women (5.5%) were trying to conceive, 2452 (13.3%) were contemplating pregnancy within 1 year, and the remaining 14 916 (81.2%) were neither trying to conceive nor thought they would be pregnant within 1 year. A total of 1314 pregnancies were documented within 12 months of pregnancy intention assessment. The cumulative incidence of pregnancy was 38.8% in women actively trying to conceive (median [IQR] time to pregnancy, 3.3 [1.5-6.7] months), 27.6% in women contemplating pregnancy (median [IQR] time to pregnancy, 6.7 [4.2-9.3] months), and 1.7% in women neither trying to conceive nor contemplating pregnancy (median [IQR] time to pregnancy, 7.8 [5.2-10.5] months) among those who became pregnant. Women who were actively trying to conceive were 23.1 times (95% CI, 19.5-27.4 times) and women who were contemplating pregnancy were 13.0 times (95% CI, 11.1-15.2 times) more likely to conceive within 12 months than women who were neither attempting nor contemplating pregnancy. Among women contemplating pregnancy at baseline who did not get pregnant during follow up, 18.8% were actively trying and 27.6% were not trying by 12 months. Conversely, only 4.9% of women neither trying to conceive nor contemplating pregnancy within 1 year at baseline changed pregnancy intention during follow up. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of reproductive-aged nurses in North America, pregnancy intention was highly fluid among women who were contemplating pregnancy but relatively stable among women trying to conceive and women who were neither trying to conceive nor contemplating pregnancy. Pregnancy intention was strongly associated with pregnancy incidence, but the median time to pregnancy points to a relatively short time window to initiate preconception care.

Association of laparoscopically-confirmed endometriosis with long COVID-19: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Women are at greater risk than men of developing chronic inflammatory conditions and "long COVID." However, few gynecologic health risk factors for long COVID-19 have been identified. Endometriosis is a common gynecologic disorder associated with chronic inflammation, immune dysregulation, and comorbid presentation with autoimmune and clotting disorders, all of which are pathophysiological mechanisms proposed for long COVID-19. Therefore, we hypothesized that women with a history of endometriosis may be at greater risk of developing long COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the association between history of endometriosis before SARS-CoV-2 infection and risk of long COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN: We followed 46,579 women from 2 ongoing prospective cohort studies-the Nurses' Health Study II and the Nurses' Health Study 3-who participated in a series of COVID-19-related surveys administered from April 2020 to November 2022. Laparoscopic diagnosis of endometriosis was documented prospectively in main cohort questionnaires before the pandemic (1993-2020) with high validity. SARS-CoV-2 infection (confirmed by antigen, polymerase chain reaction, or antibody test) and long-term COVID-19 symptoms (≥4 weeks) defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were self-reported during follow-up. Among individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection, we fit Poisson regression models to assess the associations between endometriosis and risk of long COVID-19 symptoms, with adjustment for potential confounding variables (demographics, body mass index, smoking status, history of infertility, and history of chronic diseases). RESULTS: Among 3650 women in our sample with self-reported SARS-CoV-2 infections during follow-up, 386 (10.6%) had a history of endometriosis with laparoscopic confirmation, and 1598 (43.8%) reported experiencing long COVID-19 symptoms. Most women were non-Hispanic White (95.4%), with a median age of 59 years (interquartile range, 44-65). Women with a history of laparoscopically-confirmed endometriosis had a 22% greater risk of developing long COVID-19 (adjusted risk ratio, 1.22; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.42) compared with those who had never been diagnosed with endometriosis. The association was stronger when we defined long COVID-19 as having symptoms for ≥8 weeks (risk ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-1.50). We observed no statistically significant differences in the relationship between endometriosis and long COVID-19 by age, infertility history, or comorbidity with uterine fibroids, although there was a suggestive trend indicating that the association may be stronger in women aged <50 years (<50 years: risk ratio, 1.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.88; ≥50 years: risk ratio, 1.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.41). Among persons who developed long COVID-19, women with endometriosis reported on average 1 additional long-term symptom compared with women without endometriosis. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that those with a history of endometriosis may be at modestly increased risk for long COVID-19. Healthcare providers should be aware of endometriosis history when treating patients for signs of persisting symptoms after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Future studies should investigate the potential biological pathways underlying these associations.

A prospective study of the association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination with changes in usual menstrual cycle characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Despite anecdotal reports, the impacts of SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 vaccination on menstrual health have not been systemically investigated. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the associations of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination with menstrual cycle characteristics. STUDY DESIGN: This study prospectively observed 3858 premenopausal women in the Nurses' Health Study 3 living in the United States or Canada who received biannual follow-up questionnaires between January 2011 and December 2021 and completed additional monthly and quarterly surveys related to the COVID-19 pandemic between April 2020 and November 2021. History of positive SARS-CoV-2 test, COVID-19 vaccination status, and vaccine type were self-reported in surveys conducted in 2020 and 2021. Current menstrual cycle length and regularity "before COVID-19" were reported at baseline between 2011 and 2016, and current menstrual cycle length and regularity "after COVID-19" were reported in late 2021. Pre- to post-COVID change in menstrual cycle length and regularity was calculated between reports. Logistic or multinomial logistic regression models were used to assess the associations between SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination and change in menstrual cycle characteristics. RESULTS: The median age at baseline and the median age at end of follow-up were 33 years (range, 21-51) and 42 years (range, 27-56), respectively, with a median follow-up time of 9.2 years. This study documented 421 SARS-CoV-2 infections (10.9%) and 3527 vaccinations (91.4%) during follow-up. Vaccinated women had a higher risk of increased cycle length than unvaccinated women (odds ratio, 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-2.19), after adjusting for sociodemographic and behavioral factors. These associations were similar after in addition accounting for pandemic-related stress. COVID-19 vaccination was only associated with change to longer cycles in the first 6 months after vaccination (0-6 months: odds ratio, 1.67 [95% confidence interval, 1.05-2.64]; 7-9 months: odds ratio, 1.43 [95% confidence interval, 0.96-2.14]; >9 months: odds ratio, 1.41 [95% confidence interval, 0.91-2.18]) and among women whose cycles were short, long, or irregular before vaccination (odds ratio, 2.82 [95% confidence interval, 1.51-5.27]; odds ratio, 1.10 [95% confidence interval, 0.68-1.77] for women with normal length, regular cycles before vaccination). Messenger RNA and adenovirus-vectored vaccines were both associated with this change. SARS-CoV-2 infection was not associated with changes in usual menstrual cycle characteristics. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 vaccination may be associated with short-term changes in usual menstrual cycle length, particularly among women whose cycles were short, long, or irregular before vaccination. The results underscored the importance of monitoring menstrual health in vaccine clinical trials. Future work should examine the potential biological mechanisms.