Prevalence and temporal trend of prematurity in Brazil before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a historical time series analysis, 2011-2021.

OBJECTIVE: to measure the prevalence of prematurity according to the Brazilian macro-regions and maternal characteristics over the past 11 years; to compare the proportions during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2021) with those of the historical series (2011-2019). METHODS: this was an ecological study, with data from the Live Birth Information System; the prevalence was calculated according to year, macro-region and maternal characteristics; time series analysis was performed using Prais-Winsten regression model. RESULTS: the prevalence of preterm birth in 2011-2021 was 11.1%, stable; the average in the pandemic period 11.3% (95%CI 11.2;11.4%) was similar to that of the base period 11.0% (95%CI 10.6;11.5%); the North region (11.6%) showed the highest proportion between 2011 and 2021; twin pregnancy (56.3%) and pregnant women who had 4-6 prenatal care visits (16.7%) showed an increasing trend (p-value < 0.001); the highest prevalence was observed for extremes of maternal age, pregnant women of Black race/skin color, indigenous women and those with lower level of education. CONCLUSION: preterm birth rates were highest for socially vulnerable pregnant women, twin pregnancies and in the North; stable prevalence, with no difference between periods.

COVID-19 Booster Vaccination in Early Pregnancy and Surveillance for Spontaneous Abortion.

Importance: Adherence to COVID-19 booster vaccine recommendations has lagged in pregnant and nonpregnant adult populations. One barrier to booster vaccination is uncertainty regarding the safety of booster doses among pregnant people. Objective: To evaluate whether there is an association between COVID-19 booster vaccination during pregnancy and spontaneous abortion. Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational, case-control, surveillance study evaluated people aged 16 to 49 years with pregnancies at 6 to 19 weeks' gestation at 8 health systems in the Vaccine Safety Datalink from November 1, 2021, to June 12, 2022. Spontaneous abortion cases and ongoing pregnancy controls were evaluated during consecutive surveillance periods, defined by calendar time. Exposure: Primary exposure was receipt of a third messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccine dose within 28 days before spontaneous abortion or index date (midpoint of surveillance period in ongoing pregnancy controls). Secondary exposures were third mRNA vaccine doses in a 42-day window or any COVID-19 booster in 28- and 42-day windows. Main Outcomes and Measures: Spontaneous abortion cases and ongoing pregnancy controls were identified from electronic health data using a validated algorithm. Cases were assigned to a single surveillance period based on pregnancy outcome date. Eligible ongoing pregnancy time was assigned to 1 or more surveillance periods as an ongoing pregnancy-period control. Generalized estimating equations were used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (AOR) with gestational age, maternal age, antenatal visits, race and ethnicity, site, and surveillance period as covariates and robust variance estimates to account for inclusion of multiple pregnancy periods per unique pregnancy. Results: Among 112 718 unique pregnancies included in the study, the mean (SD) maternal age was 30.6 (5.5) years. Pregnant individuals were Asian, non-Hispanic (15.1%); Black, non-Hispanic (7.5%); Hispanic (35.6%); White, non-Hispanic (31.2%); and of other or unknown (10.6%); and 100% were female. Across eight 28-day surveillance periods, among 270 853 ongoing pregnancy-period controls, 11 095 (4.1%) had received a third mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in a 28-day window; among 14 226 cases, 553 (3.9%) had received a third mRNA COVID-19 vaccine within 28 days of the spontaneous abortion. Receipt of a third mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was not associated with spontaneous abortion in a 28-day window (AOR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.86-1.03). Results were consistent when using a 42-day window (AOR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.90-1.05) and for any COVID-19 booster in a 28-day (AOR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.86-1.02) or 42-day (AOR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.89-1.04) exposure window. Conclusions and Relevance: In this case-control surveillance study, COVID-19 booster vaccination in pregnancy was not associated with spontaneous abortion. These findings support the safety of recommendations for COVID-19 booster vaccination, including in pregnant populations.

The impact of COVID-19 on the number of births in Yucatan, Mexico.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the impact of COVID-19 on the number of births in Yucatan, Mexico during 2020 and 2021. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 470 651 live births occurred in Yucatan from January 1st, 2008, to December 31st, 2021, and were included in the analysis. The monthly number of births observed during January 2008-February 2020 was used to describe pre-pandemic trends. Time-series analysis was applied to examine whether the number of births observed from December 2020 (9 months after the beginning of the pandemic) to December 2021 differed from the expected values. Trends in the number of births according to maternal age, parity and education were examined to identify changes differentiated by sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS: The number of births in 2021 decreased by 18% (5869 births) compared with 2019, which represents a reduction from 12.89 to 12.48 per thousand inhabitants. The observed number of births from December 2020 to July 2021 was significantly lower than the figure expected. April (expected = 2863 vs. observed = 1722), May (expected = 2948 vs. observed = 1990), and June (expected = 2997 vs. observed = 1978) 2021 showed the largest differences between expected and observed values. Then, from August to December 2021, the observed number of births fell within the expected range. Birth decline was slightly more pronounced among mothers between 20 and 29 years of age and in those without previous offspring. CONCLUSION: We provide evidence of birth decline in Yucatan during the COVID-19 pandemic. Birth rate reduction in Yucatan doubled the world average and young women without children were the most affected.

Maternal and neonatal outcomes of pregnancies with COVID-19 after medically assisted reproduction: results from the prospective COVID-19-Related Obstetrical and Neonatal Outcome Study.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 infections in pregnancy have been associated with maternal morbidity, admission to intensive care, and adverse perinatal outcomes such as preterm birth, stillbirth, and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. It is unclear whether medically assisted reproduction additionally affects maternal and neonatal outcomes in women with COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of medically assisted reproduction on maternal and neonatal outcomes in women with COVID-19 in pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 1485 women with COVID-19 registered in the COVID-19 Related Obstetric and Neonatal Outcome Study (a multicentric, prospective, observational cohort study) were included. The maternal and neonatal outcomes in 65 pregnancies achieved with medically assisted reproduction and in 1420 spontaneously conceived pregnancies were compared. We used univariate und multivariate (multinomial) logistic regressions to estimate the (un)adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for adverse outcomes. RESULTS: The incidence of COVID-19-associated adverse outcomes (eg, pneumonia, admission to intensive care, and death) was not different in women after conceptions with COVID-19 than in women after medically assisted reproduction pregnancies. Yet, the risk of obstetrical and neonatal complications was higher in pregnancies achieved through medically assisted reproduction. However, medically assisted reproduction was not the primary risk factor for adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes including pregnancy-related hypertensive disorders, gestational diabetes mellitus, cervical insufficiency, peripartum hemorrhage, cesarean delivery, preterm birth, or admission to neonatal intensive care. Maternal age, multiple pregnancies, nulliparity, body mass index >30 (before pregnancy) and multiple gestation contributed differently to the increased risks of adverse pregnancy outcomes in women with COVID-19 independent of medically assisted reproduction. CONCLUSION: Although women with COVID-19 who conceived through fertility treatment experienced a higher incidence of adverse obstetrical and neonatal complications than women with spontaneous conceptions, medically assisted reproduction was not the primary risk factor.

Maternal Risk Factors for Small-for-Gestational-Age Newborns in Mexico: Analysis of a Nationwide Representative Cohort.

Background: Small for gestational age (SGA) is a key contributor to premature deaths and long-term complications in life. Improved characterization of maternal risk factors associated with this adverse outcome is needed to inform the development of interventions, track progress, and reduce the disease burden. This study aimed to identify socioeconomic, demographic, and clinical factors associated with SGA in Mexico. Methods: We analyzed administrative data from 1,841,477 singletons collected by the National Information Subsystem of Livebirths during 2017. Small-for-gestational-age was defined as being <10th centiles according to the INTERGROWTH-21st standards. The comparison group was defined as being in ≥10th centiles. We fitted logistic regression models to determine odds ratios for the maternal factors associated with SGA. Results: Among the 1,841,477 singletons, 51% were male, 6.7% were SGA, 6.1% were term-SGA, and 0.5% were preterm-SGA. Maternal education presented a protective gradient of being SGA among mothers who achieved 1 to 6 years of education (adjusted odds ratio (aOR)0.95; 95% CI:0.91,0.99), 7 to 9 years (aOR 0.86; 95% CI:0.83,0.89), 10 to 12 years (aOR 0.75; 95% CI: 0.72, 0.79) and > 12 years (aOR 0.63; 95% CI:0.6,0.66) compared with those without education. SGA was particularly likely to occur among primiparous (aOR 1.42; 95% CI: 1.39, 1.43), mothers living in very high deprivation localities (aOR 1.39; 95% CI: 1.36, 1.43), young (aOR 1.04; 95% CI: 1.02, 1.06), advanced age (aOR 1.14; 95% CI 1.09, 1.19), and mothers living in areas above 2,000 m (aOR 1.69; 95% CI: 1.65, 1.73). Antenatal care was associated with a reduced risk of SGA by 30% (aOR 0.7; 95% CI:0.67,0.73), 23% (OR 0.77; 95% CI:0.74,0.8), and 21% (OR 0.79; 95% CI:0.75,0.83), compared with those mothers who never received antenatal care, when women visited the clinic at the first, second and third trimester, respectively. Conclusion: Almost 7% of live births were found to be SGA. Parity, maternal age, education, place of residence, and social deprivation were significantly associated with this outcome. Antenatal care was protective. These findings imply that interventions focusing on early and adequate contact with health care facilities, reproductive health counseling, and maternal education should reduce SGA in Mexico.

Adherence to COVID-19 preventive practice and associated factors among pregnant women in Gondar city, northwest Ethiopia, 2021: Community-based cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) causes more than five million deaths worldwide. Pregnant women are at high risk for infection due to the physiologic change in the immune and cardiopulmonary system and also it increases the risk of severe disease, intensive care unit admission, and receive mechanical ventilation when compared with non-pregnant women. It is associated with adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. So pregnant women need to have adhered to preventive measures to prevent COVID-19 related consequences. Therefore, this study aimed to assess adherence toCOVID-19 preventive practice and associated factors among pregnant women in Gondar city, northwest Ethiopia. METHODS: A community-based cross-sectional study was conducted from July 1st to 30th, 2021, in Gondar city. A cluster sampling technique was employed to select 678 pregnant women. Data were collected using a pre-tested, face-to-face interviewer-administered questionnaire. Data were entered into EPI DATA version 4.6 and exported to SPSS version 25 for analysis. Both bivariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis was fitted to identify associated factors. Adjusted odds ratio with a 95% confidence interval was used to report the association between covariates and the outcome variable. RESULTS: The prevalence of good adherence to COVID-19 preventive practice was 44.8% (95% CI: 41.3, 48.7). Maternal age (≤24 years) [AOR = 2.89, 95% CI: 1.37, 6.10], maternal education (secondary school) [AOR = 2.95, 95% CI: 1.58, 5.53] and (college and above) [AOR = 4.57,95% CI: 2.42, 8.62], having ANC follow up [AOR = 2.95, 95% CI: 1.35, 6.46] and adequate knowledge towards COVID-19 [AOR = 1.70, 95% CI: 1.20, 2.41] were significantly associated with good adherence to COVID-19 preventive practice. CONCLUSION: In this study, adherence towards COVID-19 preventive practice in pregnant women is low. Hence, it is important to strengthen women's awareness about COVID-19 through different media and health education. In addition, empowering women to attain ANC and special consideration should be given to women who had no formal education.

Impact of the early COVID-19 pandemic on outcomes in a rural Ugandan neonatal unit: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: During the early COVID-19 pandemic travel in Uganda was tightly restricted which affected demand for and access to care for pregnant women and small and sick newborns. In this study we describe changes to neonatal outcomes in one rural central Ugandan newborn unit before and during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We report outcomes from admissions captured in an electronic dataset of a well-established newborn unit before (September 2019 to March 2020) and during the early COVID-19 period (April-September 2020) as well as two seasonally matched periods one year prior. We report excess mortality as the percent change in mortality over what was expected based on seasonal trends. FINDINGS: The study included 2,494 patients, 567 of whom were admitted during the early COVID-19 period. During the pandemic admissions decreased by 14%. Patients born outside the facility were older on admission than previously (median 1 day of age vs. admission on the day of birth). There was an increase in admissions with birth asphyxia (22% vs. 15% of patients). Mortality was higher during COVID-19 than previously [16% vs. 11%, p = 0.017]. Patients born outside the facility had a relative increase of 55% above seasonal expected mortality (21% vs. 14%, p = 0.028). During this period patients had decreased antenatal care, restricted transport and difficulty with expenses and support. The hospital had difficulty with maternity staffing and supplies. There was significant community and staff fear of COVID-19. INTERPRETATION: Increased newborn mortality during the early COVID-19 pandemic at this facility was likely attributed to disruptions affecting maternal and newborn demand for, access to and quality of perinatal healthcare. Lockdown conditions and restrictions to public transit were significant barriers to maternal and newborn wellbeing, and require further focus by national and regional health officials.

Preterm birth among women with and without severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection.

INTRODUCTION: Studies directly comparing preterm birth rates in women with and without severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection are limited. Our objective was to determine whether preterm birth was affected by SARS-CoV-2 infection within a large integrated health system in New York with a universal testing protocol. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study evaluated data from seven hospitals in New York City and Long Island between March 2020 and June 2021, incorporating both the first and second waves of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the USA. All patients with live singleton gestations who had SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing at delivery were included. Deliveries before 20 weeks of gestation were excluded. The rate of preterm birth (before 37 weeks) was compared between patients with positive and negative SARS-CoV-2 test results. This analysis was performed separately for resolved prenatal infections and infections at delivery, with the latter group subdivided by symptom status. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to examine the association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and preterm birth, adjusting for maternal age, race-ethnicity, parity, history of preterm birth, body mass index, marital status, insurance type, medical co-morbidities, month of delivery, and wave of pandemic. RESULTS: A total of 31 550 patients were included and 2473 (7.8%) had laboratory-confirmed infection. Patients with symptomatic COVID-19 at delivery were more likely to deliver preterm (19.0%; adjusted odds ratio 2.76, 95% CI 1.92-3.88) compared with women with asymptomatic infection (8.8%) or without infection (7.1%). Among preterm births associated with symptomatic infection, 72.5% were medically indicated compared with 44.1% among women without infection (p < 0.001). Risk of preterm birth in patients with resolved prenatal infection was unchanged when compared with women without infection. Among women with infection at delivery, preterm birth occurred more frequently during the second wave compared with the first wave (13.6% vs. 8.7%, respectively; p < 0.006). However, this was not significant on multiple regression analysis after adjusting for other explanatory variables. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women with symptomatic COVID-19 are more than twice as likely to have a preterm delivery than patients without infection. Asymptomatic infection and resolved prenatal infection are not associated with increased risk.

Disease Severity and Perinatal Outcomes of Pregnant Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).

OBJECTIVE: To describe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity in pregnant patients and evaluate the association between disease severity and perinatal outcomes. METHODS: We conducted an observational cohort study of all pregnant patients with a singleton gestation and a positive test result for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) who delivered at 1 of 33 U.S. hospitals in 14 states from March 1 to July 31, 2020. Disease severity was classified by National Institutes of Health criteria. Maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes were abstracted by centrally trained and certified perinatal research staff. We evaluated trends in maternal characteristics and outcomes across COVID-19 severity classes and associations between severity and outcomes by multivariable modeling. RESULTS: A total of 1,219 patients were included: 47% asymptomatic, 27% mild, 14% moderate, 8% severe, 4% critical. Overall, 53% were Hispanic; there was no trend in race-ethnicity distribution by disease severity. Those with more severe illness had older mean age, higher median body mass index, and pre-existing medical comorbidities. Four maternal deaths (0.3%) were attributed to COVID-19. Frequency of perinatal death or a positive neonatal SARS-CoV-2 test result did not differ by severity. Adverse perinatal outcomes were more frequent among patients with more severe illness, including 6% (95% CI 2-11%) incidence of venous thromboembolism among those with severe-critical illness compared with 0.2% in mild-moderate and 0% in asymptomatic (P<.001 for trend across severity). In adjusted analyses, severe-critical COVID-19 was associated with increased risk of cesarean birth (59.6% vs 34.0%, adjusted relative risk [aRR] 1.57, 95% CI 1.30-1.90), hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (40.4% vs 18.8%, aRR 1.61, 95% CI 1.18-2.20), and preterm birth (41.8% vs 11.9%, aRR 3.53, 95% CI 2.42-5.14) compared with asymptomatic patients. Mild-moderate COVID-19 was not associated with adverse perinatal outcomes compared with asymptomatic patients. CONCLUSION: Compared with pregnant patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection without symptoms, those with severe-critical COVID-19, but not those with mild-moderate COVID-19, were at increased risk of perinatal complications.

Clinical and Demographic Risk Factors for COVID-19 during Delivery Hospitalizations in New York City.

OBJECTIVE: This study was aimed to review 4 weeks of universal novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) screening among delivery hospitalizations, at two hospitals in March and April 2020 in New York City, to compare outcomes between patients based on COVID-19 status and to determine whether demographic risk factors and symptoms predicted screening positive for COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study evaluated all patients admitted for delivery from March 22 to April 18, 2020, at two New York City hospitals. Obstetrical and neonatal outcomes were collected. The relationship between COVID-19 and demographic, clinical, and maternal and neonatal outcome data was evaluated. Demographic data included the number of COVID-19 cases ascertained by ZIP code of residence. Adjusted logistic regression models were performed to determine predictability of demographic risk factors for COVID-19. RESULTS: Of 454 women delivered, 79 (17%) had COVID-19. Of those, 27.9% (n = 22) had symptoms such as cough (13.9%), fever (10.1%), chest pain (5.1%), and myalgia (5.1%). While women with COVID-19 were more likely to live in the ZIP codes quartile with the most cases (47 vs. 41%) and less likely to live in the ZIP code quartile with the fewest cases (6 vs. 14%), these comparisons were not statistically significant (p = 0.18). Women with COVID-19 were less likely to have a vaginal delivery (55.2 vs. 51.9%, p = 0.04) and had a significantly longer postpartum length of stay with cesarean (2.00 vs. 2.67days, p < 0.01). COVID-19 was associated with higher risk for diagnoses of chorioamnionitis and pneumonia and fevers without a focal diagnosis. In adjusted analyses, including demographic factors, logistic regression demonstrated a c-statistic of 0.71 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69, 0.80). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 symptoms were present in a minority of COVID-19-positive women admitted for delivery. Significant differences in obstetrical outcomes were found. While demographic risk factors demonstrated acceptable discrimination, risk prediction does not capture a significant portion of COVID-19-positive patients. KEY POINTS: · COVID-19 symptoms were present in a minority of COVID-19-positive women admitted.. · COVID-19 symptomatology did not appear to differ before or after the apex of infection in New York.. · Demographic risk factors are unlikely to capture a significant portion of COVID-19-positive patients..

The severity of COVID-19 among pregnant women and the risk of adverse maternal outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during pregnancy and the risk of adverse maternal outcomes. METHODS: A descriptive-analytical cross-sectional study conducted on 258 pregnant women who were hospitalized due to confirmed COVID-19 from March 2020 to January 2021 at the Forghani Hospital in Qom, Iran. Demographic and obstetric characteristics, laboratory findings, and adverse maternal outcomes were recorded from the patients' medical records. The Fisher exact test, one-way analysis of variance, and regression logistics were used to assess the relationship between variables. RESULTS: Of the total study population, 206 (79.8%) pregnant women had mild to moderate disease, 43 (16.7%) had severe disease, and 9 (3.5%) were in the critical stage of the disease. Eight women (3.1%) died and 33 (12.8%) were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). The most important demographic factors associated with the severity of the disease were ethnicity, underlying conditions, maternal age, and parity. The severity of the disease was significantly associated with increased cesarean delivery and admission to the ICU. CONCLUSION: Pregnant women with severe and critical disease had a high rate of cesarean delivery and admission to the ICU. There were eight cases of maternal mortality.

Prioritizing IVF treatment in the post-COVID 19 era: a predictive modelling study based on UK national data.

STUDY QUESTION: Can we use prediction modelling to estimate the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID 19) related delay in starting IVF or ICSI in different groups of women? SUMMARY ANSWER: Yes, using a combination of three different models we can predict the impact of delaying access to treatment by 6 and 12 months on the probability of conception leading to live birth in women of different age groups with different categories of infertility. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Increased age and duration of infertility can prejudice the chances of success following IVF, but couples with unexplained infertility have a chance of conceiving naturally without treatment whilst waiting for IVF. The worldwide suspension of IVF could lead to worse outcomes in couples awaiting treatment, but it is unclear to what extent this could affect individual couples based on age and cause of infertility. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A population-based cohort study based on national data from all licensed clinics in the UK obtained from the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority Register. Linked data from 9589 women who underwent their first IVF or ICSI treatment in 2017 and consented to the use of their data for research were used to predict livebirth. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Three prediction models were used to estimate the chances of livebirth associated with immediate treatment versus a delay of 6 and 12 months in couples about to embark on IVF or ICSI. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: We estimated that a 6-month delay would reduce IVF livebirths by 0.4%, 2.4%, 5.6%, 9.5% and 11.8% in women aged <30, 30-35, 36-37, 38-39 and 40-42 years, respectively, while corresponding values associated with a delay of 12 months were 0.9%, 4.9%, 11.9%, 18.8% and 22.4%, respectively. In women with known causes of infertility, worst case (best case) predicted chances of livebirth after a delay of 6 months followed by one complete IVF cycle in women aged <30, 30-35, 36-37, 38-39 and 40-42 years varied between 31.6% (35.0%), 29.0% (31.6%), 23.1% (25.2%), 17.2% (19.4%) and 10.3% (12.3%) for tubal infertility and 34.3% (39.2%), 31.6% (35.3%) 25.2% (28.5%) 18.3% (21.3%) and 11.3% (14.1%) for male factor infertility. The corresponding values in those treated immediately were 31.7%, 29.8%, 24.5%, 19.0% and 11.7% for tubal factor and 34.4%, 32.4%, 26.7%, 20.2% and 12.8% in male factor infertility. In women with unexplained infertility the predicted chances of livebirth after a delay of 6 months followed by one complete IVF cycle were 41.0%, 36.6%, 29.4%, 22.4% and 15.1% in women aged <30, 30-35, 36-37, 38-39 and 40-42 years, respectively, compared to 34.9%, 32.5%, 26.9%, 20.7% and 13.2% in similar groups of women treated without any delay. The additional waiting period, which provided more time for spontaneous conception, was predicted to increase the relative number of babies born by 17.5%, 12.6%, 9.1%, 8.4% and 13.8%, in women aged <30, 30-35, 36-37, 38-39 and 40-42 years, respectively. A 12-month delay showed a similar pattern in all subgroups. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Major sources of uncertainty include the use of prediction models generated in different populations and the need for a number of assumptions. Although the models are validated and the bases for the assumptions are robust, it is impossible to eliminate the possibility of imprecision in our predictions. Therefore, our predicted live birth rates need to be validated in prospective studies to confirm their accuracy. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: A delay in starting IVF reduces success rates in all couples. For the first time, we have shown that while this results in fewer babies in older women and those with a known cause of infertility, it has a less detrimental effect on couples with unexplained infertility, some of whom conceive naturally whilst waiting for treatment. Post-COVID 19, clinics planning a phased return to normal clinical services should prioritize older women and those with a known cause of infertility. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No external funding was received for this study. B.W.M. is supported by an NHMRC Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548) and reports consultancy work for ObsEva, Merck, Merck KGaA, Guerbet and iGenomics. S.B. is Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open. None of the other authors declare any conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Pregnant women's well-being and worry during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 caused some worries among pregnant women. Worries during pregnancy can affect women's well-being. We investigated worry and well-being and associated factors among pregnant women during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted on 484 pregnant women using an online questionnaire. Sampling was performed in a period between May 5 and Aug 5, 2020. Inclusion criteria were having a single healthy fetus and having no significant psychological disorder. We collected the data using the Persian versions of the World Health Organization's Well-Being Index (WHO-5 Well-Being Index) and the Cambridge Worry Scale. We used univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses to identify predictors of women's worry and well-being. RESULTS: The mean total scores of the WHO-5 Well-Being Index and the percentage of WHO-5 score < 50 were 64.9 ± 29.0 and 24.4%, respectively. Predictors of women's worry are the increased level of fear of COVID-19 (OR = 6.40, p <  0.001), a low family income (OR = 3.41, p <  0.001), employment status (OR = 1.86, p = 0.019), nulliparity (OR = 1.68, p = 0.024), having a COVID-19 infected person among relatives (OR = 2.45, p = 0.036), having a history of abortion (OR = 1.86, p = 0.012), having participated in the study after the first wave of COVID-19 outbreak (OR = 2.328, p = 0.003), and women's age < 30 year (OR = 2.11, p = 0.002). Predictors of low level of well-being in pregnant women are worry about their own health and relationships (OR = 1.789, p = .017), worry about fetus health (OR = 1.946, p = 0.009), and having at least one infected person with COVID-19 among relatives (OR = 2.135, p = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: The percentage of women experiencing a low well-being state was relatively high. This result is worthy of attention by health care providers and policy makers. Providing care and support to pregnant women should have high priority during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Pregnancy Outcomes in COVID-19: A Prospective Cohort Study in Singapore.

INTRODUCTION: Pregnant women are reported to be at increased risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to underlying immunosuppression during pregnancy. However, the clinical course of COVID-19 in pregnancy and risk of vertical and horizontal transmission remain relatively unknown. We aim to describe and evaluate outcomes in pregnant women with COVID-19 in Singapore. METHODS: Prospective observational study of 16 pregnant patients admitted for COVID-19 to 4 tertiary hospitals in Singapore. Outcomes included severe disease, pregnancy loss, and vertical and horizontal transmission. RESULTS: Of the 16 patients, 37.5%, 43.8% and 18.7% were infected in the first, second and third trimesters, respectively. Two gravidas aged ≥35 years (12.5%) developed severe pneumonia; one patient (body mass index 32.9kg/m2) required transfer to intensive care. The median duration of acute infection was 19 days; one patient remained reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) positive >11 weeks from diagnosis. There were no maternal mortalities. Five pregnancies produced term live-births while 2 spontaneous miscarriages occurred at 11 and 23 weeks. RT-PCR of breast milk and maternal and neonatal samples taken at birth were negative; placenta and cord histology showed non-specific inflammation; and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific immunoglobulins were elevated in paired maternal and umbilical cord blood (n=5). CONCLUSION: The majority of COVID-19 infected pregnant women had mild disease and only 2 women with risk factors (obesity, older age) had severe infection; this represents a slightly higher incidence than observed in age-matched non-pregnant women. Among the women who delivered, there was no definitive evidence of mother-to-child transmission via breast milk or placenta.

Challenges for Midwives' Healthcare Practice in the Next Decade: COVID-19 - Global Climate Changes - Aging and Pregnancy - Gestational Alcohol Abuse.

Midwives are multifaceted healthcare professionals whose competence spectrum includes a large variety of knowledge and skills going from antenatal care to education and research. The aim of this review is to suggest the future challenges midwives are going to face in the upcoming decade of this Century. COVID-19 and other infections will reasonably impact healthcare workers all over the world. Midwives are frontline healthcare professionals who are constantly at risk of contagion as their job implies close contact with women, physical support and hand touch. Also, menstruation waste plays a large role in the pollution of waters, severely impacting hygiene in the developing countries and fueling climate change. Appropriate disposal of used menstrual material is still insufficient in many countries of the world especially because of lack of sanitary education on girls. As educators, midwives will be more involved into preventing inappropriate disposal of menstrual hygiene devices by educating girls around the world about the green alternatives to the commercial ones. Despite the evidences about the fertility decrement that occurs with aging, women keep postponing reproduction and increasing their chance being childless or suffering complications related to the advanced maternal age. Teen pregnancies are as well an important issue for midwives who will be called to face more age-related issues and use a tailored case to case approach, enhancing their family planning skills. Another crucial role of midwifery regards the information about the risk of drinking alcohol during gestation. Alcohol assumption during pregnancy is responsible for serious damage to the fetus causing a wide range of pathological conditions related to Fetal Alcoholic Spectrum Disorder, leading cause of mental retardation in children of western countries. On the whole, midwives have demonstrated their willingness to expand their practice through continuing professional development, and through specialist and advanced roles especially in preventive and educational positions.

COVID-19 pandemic effect on early pregnancy: are miscarriage rates altered, in asymptomatic women?

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic state on early, first-trimester pregnancies. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study conducted at a university-affiliated fertility center in Montreal, Quebec, since the COVID-19 shut down, March 13 until May 6, 2020. Included: all women who came for a first-trimester viability scan during the study period (Study group) and between March 1, 2019 and May 17, 2019, approximately one year prior (Control). The study population denied symptoms of COVID-19. We reviewed all first trimester scans. Early first-trimester pregnancy outcomes (Viable pregnancy, arrested pregnancy including biochemical pregnancy loss and miscarriage, and ectopic pregnancy) were measured as total number and percentage. A multivariate analysis was performed to control for other potentially significant variables, as was a power analysis supporting sample size. RESULTS: 113 women came for a first-trimester viability scan in the study period, and 172 in the control period (5-11 weeks gestational age), mean maternal age 36.5 ± 4.5 and 37.2 ± 5.4 years (p = 0.28). Viable clinical pregnancy rate was not different between the two groups (76.1 vs. 80.2% in the pandemic and pre-pandemic groups p = 0.41). No significant difference was seen in the total number of arrested pregnancies (defined as the sum of biochemical, 1st trimester miscarriages, and blighted ova) (22.1 vs. 16.9% p = 0.32), or in each type of miscarriage. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic environment does not seem to affect early first-trimester miscarriage rates in asymptomatic patients.

Epidemiology of coronavirus disease 2019 in pregnancy: risk factors and associations with adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 may be associated with adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes in pregnancy, but there are few controlled data to quantify the magnitude of these risks or to characterize the epidemiology and risk factors. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to quantify the associations of coronavirus disease 2019 with adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes in pregnancy and to characterize the epidemiology and risk factors. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a matched case-control study of pregnant patients with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 cases who delivered between 16 and 41 weeks' gestation from March 11 to June 11, 2020. Uninfected pregnant women (controls) were matched to coronavirus disease 2019 cases on a 2:1 ratio based on delivery date. Maternal demographic characteristics, coronavirus disease 2019 symptoms, laboratory evaluations, obstetrical and neonatal outcomes, and clinical management were chart abstracted. The primary outcomes included (1) a composite of adverse maternal outcome, defined as preeclampsia, venous thromboembolism, antepartum admission, maternal intensive care unit admission, need for mechanical ventilation, supplemental oxygen, or maternal death, and (2) a composite of adverse neonatal outcome, defined as respiratory distress syndrome, intraventricular hemorrhage, necrotizing enterocolitis, 5-minute Apgar score of <5, persistent category 2 fetal heart rate tracing despite intrauterine resuscitation, or neonatal death. To quantify the associations between exposure to mild and severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019 and adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes, unadjusted and adjusted analyses were performed using conditional logistic regression (to account for matching), with matched-pair odds ratio and 95% confidence interval based on 1000 bias-corrected bootstrap resampling as the effect measure. Associations were adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: A total of 61 confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 cases were enrolled during the study period (mild disease, n=54 [88.5%]; severe disease, n=6 [9.8%]; critical disease, n=1 [1.6%]). The odds of adverse composite maternal outcome were 3.4 times higher among cases than controls (18.0% vs 8.2%; adjusted odds ratio, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-13.4). The odds of adverse composite neonatal outcome were 1.7 times higher in the case group than to the control group (18.0% vs 13.9%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.8-4.8). Stratified analyses by disease severity indicated that the morbidity associated with coronavirus disease 2019 in pregnancy was largely driven by the severe or critical disease phenotype. Major risk factors for associated morbidity were black and Hispanic race, advanced maternal age, medical comorbidities, and antepartum admissions related to coronavirus disease 2019. CONCLUSION: Coronavirus disease 2019 during pregnancy is associated with an increased risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes, an association that is primarily driven by morbidity associated with severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019. Black and Hispanic race, obesity, advanced maternal age, medical comorbidities, and antepartum admissions related to coronavirus disease 2019 are risk factors for associated morbidity.

Population implications of cessation of IVF during the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Discontinuation of IVF cycles has been part of the radical transformation of healthcare provision to enable reallocation of staff and resources to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic. This study sought to estimate the impact of cessation of treatment on individual prognosis and US population live birth rates. DESIGN: Data from 271,438 ovarian stimulation UK IVF cycles was used to model the effect of age as a continuous, yet non-linear, function on cumulative live birth rate. This model was recalibrated to cumulative live birth rates reported for the 135,673 stimulation cycles undertaken in the USA in 2016, with live birth follow-up to October 2018. The effect of a 1-month, 3-month and 6-month shutdown in IVF treatment was calculated as the effect of the equivalent increase in a woman's age, stratified by age group. RESULTS: The average reduction in cumulative live birth rate would be 0.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.3-0.3), 0.8% (95% CI 0.8-0.8) and 1.6% (95% CI 1.6-1.6) for 1-month, 3-month and 6-month shutdowns. This corresponds to a reduction of 369 (95% CI 360-378), 1098 (95% CI 1071-1123) and 2166 (95% CI 2116-2216) live births in the cohort, respectively. Th e greatest contribution to this reduction was from older mothers. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrated that the discontinuation of fertility treatment for even 1 month in the USA could result in 369 fewer women having a live birth, due to the increase in patients' age during the shutdown. As a result of reductions in cumulative live birth rate, more cycles may be required to overcome infertility at individual and population levels.