Diversity Elements on Maternal Fetal Medicine (MFM) Fellowship Websites: Opportunity for Improvement in Recruitment and Representation.

Background: There has been a fundamental shift in recruitment of medical students and trainees into residency and fellowship programs during the Covid 19 pandemic.1 Historically, websites for medical trainees demonstrate a lack of explicit focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion. 2-7 Diversity has positive associations of improving healthcare team performance, patient care, and even financial goals.8 A lack of diversity may negatively impact patient care.9 Directed recruitment of underrepresented in medicine applicants has proven successful to increase diversity within training programs. Department websites have a more prominent role in virtual recruitment since the beginning of the COVID pandemic. Features on these websites may be utilized to attract underrepresented in medicine applicants and increase diversity in a field. Objective: To analyze Maternal Fetal Medicine fellowship websites for presence of diversity elements important to those people who are underrepresented in medicine. Study Design: Fellowship websites were accessed summer of 2021. They were analyzed for presence of twelve website elements that demonstrate commitment to diversity, including: 1) nondiscrimination statement; 2) diversity and inclusion message; 3) diversity specific language; 4) resources for trainees; 5) community demographics; 6-7) personalized biographies of faculty or fellows; 8-9) individual photographs of faculty or fellows; 10) photos or biographies of alumni; 11) diversity publications and; 12) department statistics. Program size, region, and location were collected. Self-reported underrepresented in medicine data on residency programs was extracted from the National Graduate Medical Education Survey from 2019. Programs were dichotomized into 6+ diversity elements. Nonparametric, chi-square and Fisher's exact were used for analysis. Results: Fellowship programs were analyzed (excluding military/fetal surgery, n = 91/94). Websites included a mean of 4.1± 2.5 diversity elements. Most featured fewer than 6 elements (n =75, 82.4%). When dichotomized to 6+ diversity elements, larger faculty size was the only significant factor (p=0.01). The majority of programs had fewer than 12 faculty members (n=54, 59.3%) and only 9.3% of those programs had 6 or more diversity elements. By contrast, among programs with more than 12 faculty, 29.7% had 6 or more diversity elements. Faculty photos, fellow photos, and diversity publications were the most commonly featured items (92.4%, 68.1%, and 49.5%, respectively). Mean rate of underrepresented in medicine was 18.8% ± 11.3% and no significant associations were noted. There was a non-significant difference in diversity elements in the West United States with a mean of 5.3±2.2 diversity elements, compared to 3.7±2 in the South. Conclusion: Fellowship websites convey information for trainees, especially in an era of virtual recruitment. This study highlights opportunities for directed improvements of websites for features which URIM medical trainees have identified as important.

Maternal and perinatal outcomes in mixed antenatal care modality implementing telemedicine in the southwestern region of Colombia during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Contingency measures due to the COVID-19 pandemic limited access to routine prenatal care for pregnant women, increasing the risk of pregnancy complications due to poor prenatal follow-up, especially in those patients at high obstetric risk. This prompted the implementation and adaptation of telemedicine. OBJECTIVE: We aim to evaluate the maternal and perinatal outcomes of patients who received prenatal care in-person and by telemedicine. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of pregnant women who received exclusive in-person and alternate (telemedicine and in-person) care from March to December 20,202, determining each group's maternal and neonatal outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 1078 patients were included, 156 in the mixed group and 922 in the in-person group. The patients in the mixed group had a higher number of prenatal controls (8 (6-9) vs 6 (4-8) p < 0.001), with an earlier gestational age at onset (7.1 (6-8.5) vs 9.3 (6.6-20.3), p < 0.001), however, they required a longer hospital stay (26 (16,67%) vs 86 (9,33%), p = 0.002) compared to those attended in-person; there were no significant differences in the development of obstetric emergencies, maternal death or neonatal complications. DISCUSSION: Incorporating telemedicine mixed with in-person care could be considered as an alternative for antenatal follow-up of pregnant women in low- and middle-income countries with barriers to timely and quality health care access.

Creating a Telemedicine Network of Specialists in Maternal-Fetal Medicine: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Background: Even before coronavirus disease 2019, integrating telemedicine into routine health care has become increasingly attractive. Evidence regarding the benefits of telemedicine in prenatal care is still inconclusive. As one of the largest sectors of preventive medicine with a relative paucity of specialists in maternal-fetal medicine (MFM), the implementation of telemedicine solutions into prenatal care is promising. Our objective aimed at establishing a telemedicine network of specialists in MFM for interprofessional exchange regarding high-risk pregnancies. Furthermore, the aims were to evaluate the providers' attitude toward the telemedicine solutions and to quantify the number of inpatient appointments that were avoided through interprofessional video consultations. Methods: This prospective trial was part of a larger telemedicine project funded by the European Regional Development Fund. MFM experts were brought together using the ELVI software. A questionnaire was designed for the evaluation of video consultations. The responses were analyzed by the exact McNemar-Bowker test to compare planned procedures before and after video consultation. Results: An interprofessional network of specialists in prenatal ultrasound was established with a total of 140 evaluations for statistical analysis. Interprofessional video communication was viewed favorably by providers. Overall, 47% (33/70) of the scheduled visits were avoided after video consultation. The providers' tendency to refrain from sending their patients to the University Hospital Münster was statistically noticeable (p = 0.048). Conclusions: Interprofessional exchange through video consultation holds great potential in the context of prenatal care. More prospective research is needed to clearly establish the most beneficial standard of care for both patients and providers. Clinical trial registration number: 2019-683-f-S.

The use and role of telemedicine in maternal fetal medicine around the world: an up-to-date.

Purpose: The aim of this narrative review is to sumarize data about the use and role of telemedicine in maternal fetal medicine (MFM). Methods: We searched pubmed and scopus to find articles about telemedicine in MFM by using the terms telmedicine or telehealth and maternal fetal medicine. Results: Telehealth has been widely used for several medical specialties. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, telehealth has gained investment and further research. Even though telemedicine in MFM has not been frequently applied, from 2020 onwards it has increased in both implementation and acceptance worldwide. The need to screen the patients in overloaded centers in a pandemic scenario required telemedicine in MFM, which has exhibited consistently good results concerning health and budget. The aim of this study was to review the telehealth programs and research focused on MFM around the world. Few studies have been applied to MFM and even fewer in developing and undeveloped countries. The majority of studies were concentrated in the USA and in Europe. Conclusion: Further research is needed, especially in non-developed countries, to comprehend the potential role of telemedicine in MFM for improving the life quality of the patients, health professionals, and to be cost-efficient.

Safer Baby Bundle: study protocol for the economic evaluation of a quality improvement initiative to reduce stillbirths.

INTRODUCTION: Stillbirth continues to be a public health concern in high-income countries, and with mixed results from several stillbirth prevention interventions worldwide the need for an effective prevention method is ever present. The Safer Baby Bundle (SBB) proposes five evidence-based care packages shown to reduce stillbirth when implemented individually, and therefore are anticipated to produce significantly better outcomes if grouped together. This protocol describes the planned economic evaluation of the SBB quality improvement initiative in Australia. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The implementation of the SBB will occur over three state-based health jurisdictions in Australia-New South Wales, Queensland and Victoria, from July 2019 onwards. The intervention is being applied at the state level, with sites opting to participate or not, and no individual woman recruitment. The economic evaluation will be based on a whole-of-population linked administrative dataset, which will include the data of all mothers, and their resultant children, who gave birth between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2023 in these states, covering the preimplementation and postimplementation time period. The primary health outcome for this economic evaluation is late gestation stillbirths, with the secondary outcomes including but not limited to neonatal death, gestation at birth, mode of birth, admission to special care nursery and neonatal intensive care unit, and physical and mental health conditions for mother and child. Costs associated with all healthcare use from birth to 5 years post partum will be included for all women and children. A cost-effectiveness analysis will be undertaken using a difference-in-difference analysis approach to compare the primary outcome (late gestation stillbirth) and total costs for women before and after the implementation of the bundle. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval for the SBB project was provided by the Royal Brisbane & Women's Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (approval number: HREC/2019/QRBW/47709). Approval for the extraction of data to be used for the economic evaluation was granted by the New South Wales Population and Health Services Research Ethics Committee (approval number: 2020/ETH00684/2020.11), Australian Institute of Health and Welfare Human Research Ethics Committee (approval number: EO2020/4/1167), and Public Health Approval (approval number: PHA 20.00684) was also granted. Dissemination will occur via publication in peer reviewed journals, presentation at clinical and policy-focused conferences and meetings, and through the authors' clinical and policy networks.This study will provide evidence around the cost effectiveness of a quality improvement initiative to prevent stillbirth, identifying the impact on health service use during pregnancy and long-term health service use of children.

Management of Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension in Pregnancy: Experience from a Nationally Accredited Center.

(1) Background: In pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), pregnancy is regarded a contraindication due to high maternal and fetal morbidity and mortality. We report our experience in the management of pregnancies in PAH. (2) Methods: retrospective observational study in a nationally accredited pulmonary hypertension (PH) center from 2013 to 2021. (3) Results: seven pregnancies in six women with PAH, ranging from low to high risk and 21 to 37 years old. Half had known pre-existing PAH before pregnancy. One had a multifetal gestation, and one was pregnant twice under our care. PH medical therapy and serial clinical assessment throughout pregnancy were implemented with focused attention on optimizing right heart function. Delivery was planned by a multidisciplinary team involving PH cardiology, maternal fetal medicine, and obstetric anesthesiology. Patients delivered between 31 and 40 weeks of gestation; five of the seven were via cesarean section. All received regional anesthesia and were monitored in the PH intermediate step-down unit after delivery until discharge. In all cases, delivery was without complications with excellent outcomes for the mother and child. (4) Conclusions: Multidisciplinary and tailored management of PAH in pregnancy, emphasizing optimized right heart function prior to delivery, can result in excellent clinical outcomes in a referral PH center.

COVID-19 Vaccination Status among Pregnant and Postpartum Women-A Cross-Sectional Study on More Than 1000 Individuals.

Pregnancy is a well-known factor for vaccine hesitancy and immunization remains the most effective form of prevention against coronavirus disease (COVID-19) related complications. The objective was to estimate vaccine uptake and hesitancy rate, characteristics, and factors contributing to a decision-making process among pregnant and postpartum individuals. This was a prospective cross-sectional study on 1033 pregnant (54.1%) and postpartum (45.9%) women conducted between December 2021 and March 2022 in a tertiary center for maternal-fetal medicine. Logistic regression was used to assess characteristics related to the vaccination decision process. Among responders, 74% were vaccinated and 26% were hesitant (9% planning to vaccinate and 17% totally opposed). Only 59.8% were offered a vaccine by healthcare professionals. Women with higher levels of education (OR 2.26, p < 0.0001), who received positive feedback about vaccination (OR 2.74, p = 0.0172), or were informed about COVID-19 complications in pregnancy (OR 2.6, p < 0.0001) were most likely to accept the vaccination. Hesitancy was associated with multiparity (≥3, OR 4.76, p = 0.006), worse educational status (OR 2.29, p < 0.0001), and lack of previous COVID-19 infection (OR 1.89, p < 0.0001). The most common reason for rejection was insufficient safety data (57%). Understanding factors behind vaccination status is crucial in lowering complications in mothers and newborns and targeted action may facilitate the uptake.

Investigating service delivery and perinatal outcomes during the low prevalence first year of COVID-19 in a multiethnic Australian population: a cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on perinatal outcomes in an Australian high migrant and low COVID-19 prevalent population to identify if COVID-19 driven health service changes and societal influences impact obstetric and perinatal outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study with pre COVID-19 period 1 January 2018-31 January 2020, and first year of global COVID-19 period 1 February 2020-31 January 2021. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted adjusting for confounders including age, area-level socioeconomic status, gestation, parity, ethnicity and body mass index. SETTING: Obstetric population attending three public hospitals including a major tertiary referral centre in Western Sydney, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Women who delivered with singleton pregnancies over 20 weeks gestation. Ethnically diverse women, 66% overseas born. There were 34 103 births in the district that met inclusion criteria: before COVID-19 n=23 722, during COVID-19 n=10 381. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Induction of labour, caesarean section delivery, iatrogenic and spontaneous preterm birth, small for gestational age (SGA), composite neonatal adverse outcome and full breastfeeding at hospital discharge. RESULTS: During the first year of COVID-19, there was no change for induction of labour (adjusted OR, aOR 0.97; 95% CI 0.92 to 1.02, p=0.26) and a 25% increase in caesarean section births (aOR 1.25; 95% CI 1.19 to 1.32, p<0.001). During the COVID-19 period, we found no change in iatrogenic preterm births (aOR 0.94; 95% CI 0.80 to 1.09) but a 15% reduction in spontaneous preterm birth (aOR 0.85; 95% CI 0.75 to 0.97, p=0.02) and a 10% reduction in SGA infants at birth (aOR 0.90; 95% CI 0.82 to 0.99, p=0.02). Composite adverse neonatal outcomes were marginally higher (aOR 1.08; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.15, p=0.04) and full breastfeeding rates at hospital discharge reduced by 15% (aOR 0.85; 95% CI 0.80 to 0.90, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Despite a low prevalence of COVID-19, both positive and adverse obstetric outcomes were observed that may be related to changes in service delivery and interaction with healthcare providers. Further research is suggested to understand the drivers for these changes.

Cohort profile: the Western Cape Pregnancy Exposure Registry (WCPER).

PURPOSE: The Western Cape Pregnancy Exposure Registry (PER) was established at two public sector healthcare sentinel sites in the Western Cape province, South Africa, to provide ongoing surveillance of drug exposures in pregnancy and associations with pregnancy outcomes. PARTICIPANTS: Established in 2016, all women attending their first antenatal visit at primary care obstetric facilities were enrolled and followed to pregnancy outcome regardless of the site (ie, primary, secondary, tertiary facility). Routine operational obstetric and medical data are digitised from the clinical stationery at the healthcare facilities. Data collection has been integrated into existing services and information platforms and supports routine operations. The PER is situated within the Provincial Health Data Centre, an information exchange that harmonises and consolidates all health-related electronic data in the province. Data are contributed via linkage across a unique identifier. This relationship limits the missing data in the PER, allows validation and avoids misclassification in the population-level data set. FINDINGS TO DATE: Approximately 5000 and 3500 pregnant women enter the data set annually at the urban and rural sites, respectively. As of August 2021, >30 000 pregnancies have been recorded and outcomes have been determined for 93%. Analysis of key obstetric and neonatal health indicators derived from the PER are consistent with the aggregate data in the District Health Information System. FUTURE PLANS: This represents significant infrastructure, able to address clinical and epidemiological concerns in a low/middle-income setting.

COVID-19 in the context of pregnancy, infancy and parenting (CoCoPIP) study: protocol for a longitudinal study of parental mental health, social interactions, physical growth and cognitive development of infants during the pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: While the secondary impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the psychological well-being of pregnant women and parents has become apparent over the past year, the impact of these changes on early social interactions, physical growth and cognitive development of their infants is unknown, as is the way in which a range of COVID-19-related changes have mediated this impact. This study (CoCoPIP) will investigate: (1) how parent's experiences of the social, medical and financial changes during the pandemic have impacted prenatal and postnatal parental mental health and parent-infant social interaction; and (2) the extent to which these COVID-19-related changes in parental prenatal and postnatal mental health and social interaction are associated with fetal and infant development. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The CoCoPIP study is a national online survey initiated in July 2020. This ongoing study (n=1700 families currently enrolled as of 6 May 2021) involves both quantitative and qualitative data being collected across pregnancy and infancy. It is designed to identify the longitudinal impact of the pandemic from pregnancy to 2 years of age as assessed using a range of parent- and self-report measures, with the aim of identifying if stress-associated moderators (ie, loss of income, COVID-19 illness, access to ante/postnatal support) appear to impact parental mental health, and in turn, infant development. In addition, we aim to document individual differences in social and cognitive development in toddlers who were born during restrictions intended to mitigate COVID-19 spread (eg, social distancing, national lockdowns). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was given by the University of Cambridge, Psychology Research Ethics Committee (PRE.2020.077). Findings will be made available via community engagement, public forums (eg, social media,) and to national (eg, NHS England) and local (Cambridge Universities Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust) healthcare partners. Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviews journals.

Perspective: Chicken Models for Studying the Ontogenetic Origin of Neuropsychiatric Disorders.

Nutrients and xenobiotics cross the blood-placenta barrier, potentially depositing in the fetal brain. The prenatal exposure affects the neuroendocrine and microbial development. The mechanism underlying maternal risk factors reprograming the microbiota-gut-brain axis with long-term effects on psychosocial behaviors in offspring is not clear. In humans, it is not possible to assess the nutrient or xenobiotic deposition in the fetal brain and gastrointestinal system for ethical reasons. Moreover, the maternal-fetal microbe transfer during gestation, natural labor, and breast-feeding constitutes the initial gut microbiome in the progeny, which is inevitable in the most widely utilized rodent models. The social predisposition in precocial birds, including chickens, provides the possibility to test behavioral responses shortly after being hatched. Hence, chickens are advantageous in investigating the ontogenetic origin of behaviors. Chicken embryos are suitable for deposition assessment and mechanistic study due to the accessibility, self-contained development, uniform genetic background, robust microbiota, and easy in vivo experimental manipulation compared to humans and rodents. Therefore, chicken embryos can be used as an alternative to the rodent models in assessing the fetal exposure effect on neurogenesis and investigating the mechanism underlying the ontogenetic origin of neuropsychiatric disorders.

Heated tobacco product use and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and low birth weight: analysis of a cross-sectional, web-based survey in Japan

ObjectivesKnowledge on the impact of heated tobacco product (HTP) use in pregnant women with associated maternal and neonatal risks for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) and low birth weight (LBW) is limited. We aimed to assess the status of HTP use among pregnant women in Japan and explore the association of HTP use with HDP and LBW.DesignCross-sectional study.SettingData from the Japan ‘COVID-19 and Society’ Internet Survey study, a web-based nationwide survey.ParticipantsWe investigated 558 postdelivery and 365 currently pregnant women in October 2020.Primary and secondary outcome measuresInformation on HDP and LBW was collected from the postdelivery women’s Maternal and Child Health Handbooks (maternal and newborn records). We estimated the age-adjusted ORs and 95% CIs of ever HTP smokers for HDP and LBW and compared them with those of never HTP smokers in a logistic regression analysis.ResultsThe prevalence of ever and current HTP use were 11.7% and 2.7% in postdelivery women and 12.6% and 1.1% in currently pregnant women, respectively. Among currently pregnant women who were former combustible cigarette smokers, 4.4% (4/91) were current HTP smokers. Among postdelivery women, ever HTP smokers had a higher HDP incidence (13.8% vs 6.5%, p=0.03;age-adjusted OR=2.48, 95% CI 1.11 to 5.53) and higher LBW incidence (18.5% vs 8.9%, p=0.02;age-adjusted OR=2.36, 95% CI 1.16 to 4.87).ConclusionsIn Japan, the incidence of ever HTP use exceeded 10% among pregnant women, and HTP smoking may be associated with maternal and neonatal risks.

Collaborative maternity and newborn dashboard (CoMaND) for the COVID-19 pandemic: a protocol for timely, adaptive monitoring of perinatal outcomes in Melbourne, Australia.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a range of unprecedented disruptions to maternity care with documented impacts on perinatal outcomes such as stillbirth and preterm birth. Metropolitan Melbourne has endured one of the longest and most stringent lockdowns in globally. This paper presents the protocol for a multicentre study to monitor perinatal outcomes in Melbourne, Australia, during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Multicentre observational study analysing monthly deidentified maternal and newborn outcomes from births >20 weeks at all 12 public maternity services in Melbourne. Data will be merged centrally to analyse outcomes and create run charts according to established methods for detecting non-random 'signals' in healthcare. Perinatal outcomes will include weekly rates of total births, stillbirths, preterm births, neonatal intensive care admissions, low Apgar scores and fetal growth restriction. Maternal outcomes will include weekly rates of: induced labour, caesarean section, births before arrival to hospital, postpartum haemorrhage, length of stay, general anaesthesia for caesarean birth, influenza and COVID-19 vaccination status, and gestation at first antenatal visit. A prepandemic median for all outcomes will be calculated for the period of January 2018 to March 2020. A significant shift is defined as ≥6 consecutive weeks, all above or below the prepandemic median. Additional statistical analyses such as regression, time series and survival analyses will be performed for an in-depth examination of maternal and perinatal outcomes of interests. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval for the collaborative maternity and newborn dashboard project has been obtained from the Austin Health (HREC/64722/Austin-2020) and Mercy Health (ref. 2020-031). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12620000878976; Pre-results.

Assessment of an intervention to optimise antenatal management of women admitted with preterm labour and intact membranes using amniocentesis-based predictive risk models: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial (OPTIM-PTL Study).

INTRODUCTION: The majority of women admitted with threatened preterm labour (PTL) do not delivery prematurely. While those with microbial invasion of the amniotic cavity (MIAC) represent the highest risk group, this is a condition that is not routinely ruled out since it requires amniocentesis. Identification of low-risk or high-risk cases might allow individualisation of care, that is, reducing overtreatment with corticosteroids and shorten hospital stay in low-risk women, while allowing early antibiotic therapy in those with MIAC. Benefits versus risks of amniocentesis-based predictor models of spontaneous delivery within 7 days and/or MIAC have not been evaluated. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This will be a Spanish randomised, multicentre clinical trial in singleton pregnancies (23.0-34.6 weeks) with PTL, conducted in 13 tertiary centres. The intervention arm will consist in the use of amniocentesis-based predictor models: if low risk, hospital discharge within 24 hours of results with no further medication will be recommended. If high risk, antibiotics will be added to standard management. The control group will be managed according to standard institutional protocols, without performing amniocentesis for this indication. The primary outcome will be total antenatal doses of corticosteroids, and secondary outcomes will be days of maternal stay and the occurrence of clinical chorioamnionitis. A cost analysis will be undertaken. To observe a reduction from 90% to 70% in corticosteroid doses, a reduction in 1 day of hospital stay (SD of 2) and a reduction from 24% to 12% of clinical chorioamnionitis, a total of 340 eligible patients randomised 1 to 1 to each study arm is required (power of 80%, with type I error α=0.05 and two-sided test, considering a dropout rate of 20%). Randomisation will be stratified by gestational age and centre. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Prior to receiving approval from the Ethics Committee (HCB/2020/1356) and the Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices (AEMPS) (identification number: 2020-005-202-26), the trial was registered in the European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials database (2020-005202-26). AEMPS approved the trial as a low-intervention trial. All participants will be required to provide written informed consent. Findings will be disseminated through workshops, peer-reviewed publications and national/international conferences. PROTOCOL VERSION: V.4 10 May 2021. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT04831086 and Eudract number 2020-005202-26.

Application of telemedicine video visits in a maternal-fetal medicine practice at the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine in obstetrics has mostly been described in the rural areas that have limited access to subspecialties. During the COVID-19 pandemic, health systems rapidly expanded telemedicine services for urgent and nonurgent healthcare delivery, even in urban settings. The New York University health system implemented a prompt systemwide expansion of video-enabled telemedicine visits, increasing telemedicine to >8000 visits daily within 6 weeks of the beginning of the pandemic. There are limited studies that explore patient and provider satisfaction of telemedicine visits in obstetrical patients during the COVID-19 epidemic, particularly in the United States. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate both the patients' and the providers' satisfaction with the administration of maternal-fetal medicine services through telemedicine and to identify the factors that drive the patients' desire for future obstetrical telemedicine services. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey was administered to patients who completed a telemedicine video visit with the Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine at the New York University Langone Hospital-Long Island from March 19, 2020, to May 26, 2020. A 10-question survey assessing the patients' digital experience and desire for future use was either administered by telephone or self-administered by the patients via a link after obtaining verbal consent. The survey responses were scored from 1-strongly disagree to 5-strongly agree. We analyzed the demographics and survey responses of the patients who agreed to vs those who answered neutral or disagree to the question "I would like telehealth to be an option for future obstetric visits." The providers also answered a similar 10-question survey. The median scores were compared using appropriate tests. A P value of <.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: A total of 253 patients participated in 433 telemedicine visits, and 165 patients completed the survey, resulting in a 65% survey response rate. Overall, there were high rates of patient satisfaction in all areas assessed. Those who desired future telemedicine had significantly greater agreeability that they were able to see and hear their provider easily (5 [4.5, 5] vs 5 [4, 5]; P=.014) and that the lack of physical activity was not an issue (5 [4, 5] vs 5 [4, 5]; P=.032). They were also more likely to agree that the telemedicine visits were as good as in-person visits (4 [3, 5] vs 3 [2, 3]; P<.001) and that telehealth made it easier for them to see doctors or specialists (5 [4, 5] vs 3 [2, 3]; P<.001). The patients seeking consults for poor obstetrical history were more likely to desire future telemedicine compared with other visit types (19 (90%) vs 2 (10%); P=.05). Provider survey responses also demonstrated high levels of satisfaction, with 83% agreeing that they would like telemedicine to be an option for future obstetrical visits. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that maternal-fetal medicine obstetrical patients and providers were highly satisfied with the implementation of telemedicine during the initial wave of the COVID-19 pandemic and a majority of them desire telemedicine as an option for future visits. A patient's desire for future telemedicine visits was significantly affected by their digital experience, the perception of a lack of need for physical contact, perceived time saved on travel, and access to healthcare providers. Health systems need to continue to improve healthcare delivery and invest in innovative solutions to conduct physical examinations remotely.

Socioeconomic inequalities and adverse pregnancy outcomes in the UK and Republic of Ireland: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: There has been an unprecedented rise in infant mortality associated with deprivation in recent years in the United Kingdom (UK) and Republic of Ireland. A healthy pregnancy can have significant impacts on the life chances of children. The objective of this review was to understand the association between individual-level and household-level measures of socioeconomic status and adverse pregnancy outcomes. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Nine databases were searched (Medline, Embase, Scopus, ASSIA, CINAHL, PsycINFO, BNI, MIDRIS and Google Scholar) for articles published between 1999 and August 2019. Grey literature searches were also assessed. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies reporting associations between individual-level or household socioeconomic factors on pregnancy outcomes in the UK or Ireland. RESULTS: Among the 82 353 search results, 53 821 titles were identified and 35 unique studies met the eligibility criteria. Outcomes reported were neonatal, perinatal and maternal mortality, preterm birth, birth weight and mode of delivery. Pooled effect sizes were calculated using random-effects meta-analysis. There were significantly increased odds of women from lower levels of occupation/social classes compared with the highest level having stillbirth (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.59, I298.62%), neonatal mortality (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.57, I297.09%), perinatal mortality (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.57, I298.69%), preterm birth (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.33 to 1.50, I270.97%) and low birth weight (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.61, I299.85%). Limitations relate to available data, unmeasured confounders and the small number of studies for some outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This review identified consistent evidence that lower occupational status, especially manual occupations and unemployment, were significantly associated with increased risk of multiple adverse pregnancy outcomes. Strategies to improve pregnancy outcomes should incorporate approaches that address wider determinants of health to provide women and families with the best chances of having a healthy pregnancy and baby and to decrease pregnancy-related health inequalities in the general population. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42019140893.

Maternal-fetal medicine program director experience of exclusive virtual interviewing during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic necessitated an abrupt transition to exclusive virtual interviewing for maternal-fetal medicine fellowship programs. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the maternal-fetal medicine fellowship program directors' approaches to exclusive virtual interviews and to obtain program director feedback on the virtual interview experience to guide future interview cycles. STUDY DESIGN: A novel cross-sectional online survey was distributed through the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine to program directors after the completion of the interview season, but before the results of the National Resident Matching Program on October 14, 2020. Survey data were collected anonymously and managed using secure Research Electronic Data Capture electronic data capture tools. RESULTS: Overall 71 of 89 program directors (80%) responded. All respondents completed their 2020 interviews 100% virtually. Nearly half of program directors (33 of 68, 49%) interviewed more candidates in 2020 than in 2019. Of those who interviewed more candidates in 2020, the mean number of additional candidates per fellowship position was 5.8 (standard deviation, ±3.8). Almost all program directors reported no (35 of 71, 49%) or minimal (34 of 71, 48%) negative impact of technical difficulties on their virtual interview processes. Most programs structured their interview to a half day (4 hours) or less for the candidates. Many programs were able to adapt their supplemental interview materials and events for the candidates into a virtual format, including a virtual social event hosted by 31 of 71 programs (44%). The virtual social event was most commonly casual and led by current fellows. Ultimately, all program directors reported that the virtual interview experience was as expected or better than expected. However, most program directors felt less able to provide candidates with a comprehensive and accurate representation of their program on a virtual platform compared with their previous in-person experiences (46 of 71 [65%] reported minimally, moderately, or significantly less than in-person). In addition, most program directors felt their ability to get to know candidates and assess their "fit" with the program was less than previous in-person years (44 of 71 [62%] reported minimally, moderately, or significantly less than in-person). In a hypothetical future year without any public health concerns, there were 23 of 71 respondents (32%) who prefer exclusive in-person interviews, 24 of 71 (34%) who prefer exclusive virtual interviews, and 24 of 71 (34%) who prefer a hybrid of virtual and in-person interviews. CONCLUSION: The virtual interview experience was better than expected for most program directors. However, most program directors felt less able to present their programs and assess the candidates on a virtual platform compared with previous in-person experiences. Despite this, most program directors are interested in at least a component of virtual interviewing in future years. Future efforts are needed to refine the virtual interview process to optimize the experience for program directors and candidates.