Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 102
Filter
1.
BMJ Case Rep ; 15(5)2022 May 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1861602

ABSTRACT

Globally, obstetric emergencies majorly account for maternal morbidity and mortality. Guerrero, Oaxaca and Chiapas accounted for more than 13% of maternal deaths in the country in 2021. Obstetric haemorrhage was the leading cause of maternal death after COVID-19 infection and hypertensive disorders. This case highlights the clinical course and social determinants of health that limited access to health services in a young woman with an obstetric emergency in rural southern Mexico. The case describes common challenges during an obstetric emergency in resource-poor settings, such as timely referral to a second level of care. Our analysis identifies the social determinants of health behind the slow and inadequate emergency response. Additionally, we present several interventions that can be implemented in low-resource settings for strengthening the response to obstetric emergencies at the primary and secondary levels of care.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Incomplete , Abortion, Spontaneous , COVID-19 , Emergencies , Female , Health Services , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Mexico/epidemiology , Pregnancy , Pregnant Women
2.
An Acad Bras Cienc ; 94(2): e20211283, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1833800

ABSTRACT

Aim of this study is to investigate whether the risk of miscarriage increases in pregnant women who had COVID-19 in first trimester. Our study included 52 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection detected by RT-PCR and 53 patients with negative RT-PCR test in samples taken with nasopharyngeal swab in the first trimester between March 1 and December 31, 2020. Complete abortion, incomplete abortion, blighted ovum, intrauterine exitus, biochemical pregnancies were accepted as in the miscarriage group (MG). Pregnant women with COVID-19 and control group were compared in terms of demographic data, miscarriage rate and laboratory results. Patients were divided into MG and ongoing pregnancy groups (OPG) and compared in terms of the diagnosed weeks, clinical findings, laboratory results, treatments, and hospitalization. While miscarriage was observed in 15 (28.8%) of pregnant women infected with SARS-CoV-2 in the first trimester, this number was 7 (13.2%) in the control group. While the common symptoms in the MG were cough (60%), fever (53.3%), shortness of breath (53.3%), and fatigue (46.7%) (p<0.05); asymptomatic patients (51.4%) were higher in the OPG (p<0.001). Hospitalized patients were 33.3% in the MG and 8.1% in the OPG (p=0.02). According to the results of our study, the risk of miscarriage increases in pregnant women infected with SARS-CoV-2 (especially in severe infection) in the first trimester.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Spontaneous , COVID-19 , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , Abortion, Spontaneous/etiology , COVID-19/complications , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/diagnosis , Pregnancy Trimester, First , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Bioethics ; 36(4): 469-471, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1831966
4.
JAMA Intern Med ; 182(5): 491-493, 2022 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1798077
5.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ; 22(1): 313, 2022 Apr 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1789105

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: People using maternity services in the United Kingdom (UK) have faced significant changes brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic and social distancing regulations. We focused on the experiences of pregnant women using UK maternity services during the pandemic and the impact of social distancing rules on their mental health and wellbeing. METHODS: We conducted 23 qualitative semi-structured interviews from June 2020 to August 2021, with women from across the UK who experienced a pregnancy during the pandemic. Nineteen participants in the study carried their pregnancy to term and four had experienced a miscarriage during the pandemic. Interviews took place remotely over video or telephone call, discussing topics such as mental health during pregnancy and use of UK maternity services. We used reflexive thematic analysis to analyse interview transcripts. RESULTS: We generated six higher order themes: [1] Some pregnancy discomforts alleviated by social distancing measures, [2] The importance of relationships that support coping and adjustment, [3] Missed pregnancy and parenthood experiences, [4] The mental health consequences of birth partner and visitor restrictions, [5] Maternity services under pressure, and [6] Lack of connection with staff. Many participants felt a sense of loss over a pregnancy experience that differed so remarkably to what they had expected because of the pandemic. Supportive relationships were important to help cope with pregnancy and pandemic-related changes; but feelings of isolation were compounded for some participants because opportunities to build social connections through face-to-face parent groups were unavailable. Participants also described feeling alone due to restrictions on their partners being present when accessing UK maternity services. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight some of the changes that may have affected pregnant women's mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Reduced social support and being unable to have a partner or support person present during maternity service use were the greatest concerns reported by participants in this study. Absence of birth partners removed a protective buffer in times of uncertainty and distress. This suggests that the availability of a birth partner or support person must be prioritised wherever possible in times of pandemics to protect the mental health of people experiencing pregnancy and miscarriage.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Spontaneous , COVID-19 , Maternal Health Services , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Female , Humans , Mental Health , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pregnancy , Pregnant Women/psychology , Qualitative Research , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom/epidemiology
7.
Bioethics ; 36(6): 708-714, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1779176

ABSTRACT

Many "anti-vaxxers" oppose COVID-19 vaccination mandates on the grounds that they wrongfully infringe on bodily autonomy. Their view has been expressed with the slogan "My Body, My Choice," co-opted from the pro-choice abortion rights movement. Yet, many of those same people are pro-life and support abortion restrictions that are effectively a kind of gestation mandate. Both vaccine and gestation mandates impose restrictions on bodily autonomy in order to prevent serious harms. This article evaluates the defensibility of the anti-vax pro-life position. We argue that the case for opposing gestation mandates on grounds of bodily autonomy is much stronger than the case for opposing vaccine mandates-even if fetuses have full moral status. Thus, there is a deep tension in being a pro-life, COVID anti-vaxxer concerned with bodily autonomy.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Induced , Abortion, Spontaneous , COVID-19 , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Female , Humans , Pregnancy
8.
Acta Neurol Scand ; 146(1): 6-23, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1779169

ABSTRACT

While neurologic complications are frequently reported among patients with COVID-19 in the general population, they are unknown in pregnant women. This paper summarizes the case reports of pregnant women with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection plus a specified neurologic diagnosis. Until November 2021, 18 case reports were found. Both the central and peripheral nervous systems were equally affected: delirium (n = 1), posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (n = 4), cerebrovascular disease (n = 2), acute cerebral demyelinating disease (n = 1), acute necrotizing encephalopathy (n = 1), Guillain-Barré syndrome (n = 5), including one patient who also had vestibular neuritis, Bell's palsy (n = 3), and rhabdomyolysis (n = 1). The median maternal age was 32.5 (25-35) years, the median gestational age was 34 (30-36.5) weeks, and 38.9% presented previous medical conditions. Respiratory symptoms were reported in 76.5%, and 76.5% received immunotherapies to treat the COVID-19 or the neurologic complications. Half the women required admission to ICU and, more often, were those with central nervous system involvement (77.8% vs. 22.2%; Chi-square test, p = .018). For 64.7% of women, the most common method of delivery was surgical, although just one case was due to the neurologic complication. There were reports of one spontaneous abortion, two fetal deaths, and no maternal deaths. Only one case presented a poor neurologic outcome. It is possible that our findings are underestimated, considering that there are thousands of reports regarding neurologic complications in the general population with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Spontaneous , COVID-19 , Posterior Leukoencephalopathy Syndrome , Pregnancy Complications , Abortion, Spontaneous/epidemiology , Adult , COVID-19/complications , Female , Humans , Infant , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications/epidemiology , Pregnancy Complications/etiology , Pregnancy Complications/therapy , Pregnancy Outcome , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Hum Reprod ; 37(6): 1126-1133, 2022 05 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1778911

ABSTRACT

STUDY QUESTION: Does maternal infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the first trimester affect the risk of miscarriage before 13 week's gestation? SUMMARY ANSWER: Pregnant women with self-reported diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 in the first trimester had a higher risk of early miscarriage. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Viral infections during pregnancy have a broad spectrum of placental and neonatal pathology. Data on the effects of the SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy are still emerging. Two systematic reviews and meta-analyses reported an increased risk of preterm birth, caesarean delivery, maternal morbidity and stillbirth. Data on the impact of first trimester infection on early pregnancy outcomes are scarce. This is the first study, to our knowledge, to investigate the rates of early pregnancy loss during the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak among women with self-reported infection. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This was a nationwide prospective cohort study of pregnant women in the community recruited using social media between 21 May and 31 December 2020. We recruited 3545 women who conceived during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic who were <13 week's gestation at the time of recruitment. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The COVID-19 Contraception and Pregnancy Study (CAP-COVID) was an on-line survey study collecting longitudinal data from pregnant women in the UK aged 18 years or older. Women who were pregnant during the pandemic were asked to complete on-line surveys at the end of each trimester. We collected data on current and past pregnancy complications, their medical history and whether they or anyone in their household had symptoms or been diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection during each trimester of their pregnancy. RT-PCR-based SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection from respiratory samples (e.g. nasopharynx) is the standard practice for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 in the UK. We compared rate of self-reported miscarriage in three groups: 'presumed infected', i.e. those who reported a diagnosis with SARS-CoV-2 infection in the first trimester; 'uncertain', i.e. those who did not report a diagnosis but had symptoms/household contacts with symptoms/diagnosis; and 'presumed uninfected', i.e. those who did not report any symptoms/diagnosis and had no household contacts with symptoms/diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 3545 women registered for the CAP-COVID study at <13 weeks gestation and were eligible for this analysis. Data for the primary outcome were available from 3041 women (86%). In the overall sample, the rate of self-reported miscarriage was 7.8% (238/3041 [95% CI, 7-9]). The median gestational age (GA) at miscarriage was 9 weeks (interquartile range 8-11). Seventy-seven women were in the 'presumed infected' group (77/3041, 2.5% [95% CI 2-3]), 295/3041 were in the uncertain group (9.7% [95% CI 9-11]) and the rest in the 'presumed uninfected' (87.8%, 2669/3041 [95% CI 87-89]). The rate of early miscarriage was 14% in the 'presumed infected' group, 5% in the 'uncertain' and 8% in the 'presumed uninfected' (11/77 [95% CI 6-22] versus 15/295 [95% CI 3-8] versus 212/2669 [95% CI 7-9], P = 0.02). After adjusting for age, BMI, ethnicity, smoking status, GA at registration and the number of previous miscarriages, the risk of early miscarriage appears to be higher in the 'presumed infected' group (relative rate 1.7, 95% CI 1.0-3.0, P = 0.06). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We relied on self-reported data on early pregnancy loss and SARS-CoV-2 infection without any means of checking validity. Some women in the 'presumed uninfected' and 'uncertain' groups may have had asymptomatic infections. The number of 'presumed infected' in our study was low and therefore the study was relatively underpowered. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This was a national study from the UK, where infection rates were one of the highest in the world. Based on the evidence presented here, women who are infected with SARS-CoV-2 in their first trimester may be at an increased risk of a miscarriage. However, the overall rate of miscarriage in our study population was 8%. This is reassuring and suggests that if there is an effect of SARS-CoV-2 on the risk of miscarriage, this may be limited to those with symptoms substantial enough to lead to a diagnostic test. Further studies are warranted to evaluate a causal association between SARS-CoV-2 infection in early pregnancy and miscarriage risk. Although we did not see an overall increase in the risk of miscarriage, the observed comparative increase in the presumed infected group reinforces the message that pregnant women should continue to exercise social distancing measures and good hygiene throughout their pregnancy to limit their risk of infection. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was supported by a grant from the Elizabeth Garrett Anderson Hospital Charity (G13-559194). The funders of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation or writing of the report. J.A.H. is supported by an NIHR Advanced Fellowship. A.L.D. is supported by the National Institute for Health Research University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre. All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf and declare: support to J.A.H. and A.L.D. as above; no financial relationships with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous 3 years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Spontaneous , COVID-19 , Premature Birth , Abortion, Spontaneous/epidemiology , Abortion, Spontaneous/etiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Pandemics , Placenta , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Trimester, First , Premature Birth/epidemiology , Premature Birth/etiology , Prospective Studies , RNA, Viral , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom/epidemiology
10.
J Reprod Immunol ; 151: 103503, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1778343

ABSTRACT

The work entitled "Preliminary Findings of mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine Safety in Pregnant Persons" published on April 21, 2021, in The New England Journal of Medicine, presented data collected from American surveillance systems and registries. However, problems with an unanimous interpretation of those results appeared in the public debate and citing articles. Some stated that the risk of miscarriage in vaccinated women was similar to historical values reported before the vaccines' approval. The others stated that risk was highly above-normative in women vaccinated during the first and second trimesters. We found several problems with the statistical treatment/interpretation of the originally presented values: a substantial percentage (up to 95.6%) of missing data, an incorrect denominator used for risk estimation, and too short follow-up that disabled the evaluation of the study's endpoint in numerous participants. Eventually, the Authors published a corrigendum on September 8, 2021, and pointed to updated data. Herein, we explain the statistical controversies raised by the original presentation and stress that analyzing the trade-off between knowledge and confusion brought by the release of incomplete results of such a high social interest, should aid in solving the dilemma of whether to publish preliminary data or none.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Spontaneous , COVID-19 , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Pregnant Women , RNA, Messenger , United States
11.
Front Public Health ; 9: 725762, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1775844

ABSTRACT

Miscarriage is increasingly gaining recognition, both in scientific literature and media outlets, as a loss that has significant and lasting effects on parents, though often disenfranchised and overlooked by both personal support networks and healthcare providers. For both men and women, miscarriage can usher in intense grief, despair, and difficulty coping, and for women in particular, there is evidence of increased prevalence of depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress. Additionally, miscarriage can contribute to decreased relationship satisfaction and increased risk of separation, all while stigma and disenfranchisement create a sense of isolation. Despite this increased need for support, research indicates that many parents experience their healthcare providers as dismissive of the significance of the loss and as primarily focusing only on the physical elements of care. Research exploring the barriers to providers engaging in more biopsychosocial-oriented care has identified time constraints, lack of resources, lack of training in addressing loss, and compassion fatigue as key areas for intervention. This paper will review the biopsychosocial elements of miscarriage and discuss a multidisciplinary, family-oriented approach that can be implemented in healthcare settings to ensure a high quality and holistic level of care for individuals, couples, and families experiencing pregnancy loss.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Spontaneous , Female , Grief , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Male , Parents/psychology , Pregnancy
12.
Front Immunol ; 13: 861245, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1775684

ABSTRACT

Pregnancy can be defined a vascular event upon endocrine control. In the human hemo-chorial placentation the chorionic villi penetrate the wall of the uterine spiral arteries, to provide increasing amounts of nutrients and oxygen for optimal fetal growth. In any physiological pregnancy the natural maternal response is of a Th1 inflammatory type, aimed at avoiding blood loss through the arteriolar wall openings. The control of the vascular function, during gestation as in any other condition, is achieved through the action of two main types of prostanoids: prostaglandin E2 and thromboxane on the one hand (for vasoconstriction and coagulation), prostacyclin on the other (for vasodilation and blood fluidification). The control of the maternal immune response is upon the responsibility of the fetus itself. Indeed, the chorionic villi are able to counteract the natural maternal response, thus changing the inflammatory Th1 type into the anti-inflammatory Th2. Clinical and experimental research in the past half century address to inflammation as the leading cause of abortion, pregnancy loss, premature delivery and related pulmonary, cerebral, intestinal fetal syndromes. Increased level of Interleukin 6, Interleukin 1-beta, Tumor Necrosis Factor-alfa, Interferon-gamma, are some among the well-known markers of gestational inflammation. On the other side, COVID-19 pneumonia is a result of extensive inflammation induced by viral replication within the cells of the respiratory tract. As it may happen in the uterine arteries in the absence of an effective fetal control, viral pneumonia triggers pulmonary vascular coagulation. The cytokines involved in the process are the same as those in gestational inflammation. As the fetus breathes throughout the placenta, fetal death from placental thrombosis is similar to adult death from pulmonary thrombosis. Preventing and counteracting inflammation is mandatory in both conditions. The most relevant literature dealing with the above-mentioned concepts is reviewed in the present article.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Spontaneous , COVID-19 , Thrombosis , Abortion, Spontaneous/pathology , Adult , Cytokines , Female , Humans , Inflammation/pathology , Placenta/pathology , Pregnancy , Thrombosis/pathology
13.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ; 22(1): 272, 2022 Mar 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1770508

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Antenatal anxiety has been linked to adverse obstetric outcomes, including miscarriage and preterm birth. However, most studies investigating anxiety during pregnancy, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, have focused on symptoms during the second and third trimester. This study aims to describe the prevalence of anxiety symptoms early in pregnancy and identify predictors of early pregnancy anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We assessed baseline moderate-to-severe anxiety symptoms after enrollment in the UCSF ASPIRE (Assessing the Safety of Pregnancy in the Coronavirus Pandemic) Prospective Cohort from May 2020 through February 2021. Pregnant persons < 10 weeks' gestation completed questions regarding sociodemographic characteristics, obstetric/medical history, and pandemic-related experiences. Univariate and multivariate hierarchical logistic regression analyses determined predictors of moderate or severe anxiety symptoms (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 questionnaire score ≥ 10). All analyses performed with Statistical Analysis Software (SAS®) version 9.4. RESULTS: A total of 4,303 persons completed the questionnaire. The mean age of this nationwide sample was 33 years of age and 25.7% of participants received care through a fertility clinic. Over twelve percent of pregnant persons reported moderate-to-severe anxiety symptoms. In univariate analysis, less than a college education (p < 0.0001), a pre-existing history of anxiety (p < 0.0001), and a history of prior miscarriage (p = 0.0143) were strong predictors of moderate-to-severe anxiety symptoms. Conversely, having received care at a fertility center was protective (26.6% vs. 25.7%, p = 0.0009). COVID-19 related stressors including job loss, reduced work hours during the pandemic, inability to pay rent, very or extreme worry about COVID-19, and perceived stress were strongly predictive of anxiety in pregnancy (p < 0.0001). In the hierarchical logistic regression model, pre-existing history of anxiety remained associated with anxiety during pregnancy, while the significance of the effect of education was attenuated. CONCLUSION(S): Pre-existing history of anxiety and socioeconomic factors likely exacerbated the impact of pandemic-related stressors on early pregnancy anxiety symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite on-going limitations for in-person prenatal care administration, continued emotional health support should remain an important focus for providers, particularly when caring for less privileged pregnant persons or those with a pre-existing history of anxiety.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Spontaneous , COVID-19 , Pregnancy Complications , Premature Birth , Abortion, Spontaneous/epidemiology , Adult , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety Disorders/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Pandemics , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications/psychology , Premature Birth/epidemiology , Prospective Studies
14.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ; 21(1): 658, 2021 Sep 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1770502

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Whilst the impact of Covid-19 infection in pregnant women has been examined, there is a scarcity of data on pregnant women in the Middle East. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the impact of Covid-19 infection on pregnant women in the United Arab Emirates population. METHODS: A case-control study was carried out to compare the clinical course and outcome of pregnancy in 79 pregnant women with Covid-19 and 85 non-pregnant women with Covid-19 admitted to Latifa Hospital in Dubai between March and June 2020. RESULTS: Although Pregnant women presented with fewer symptoms such as fever, cough, sore throat, and shortness of breath compared to non-pregnant women; yet they ran a much more severe course of illness. On admission, 12/79 (15.2%) Vs 2/85 (2.4%) had a chest radiograph score [on a scale 1-6] of ≥3 (p-value = 0.0039). On discharge, 6/79 (7.6%) Vs 1/85 (1.2%) had a score ≥3 (p-value = 0.0438). They also had much higher levels of laboratory indicators of severity with values above reference ranges for C-Reactive Protein [(28 (38.3%) Vs 13 (17.6%)] with p < 0.004; and for D-dimer [32 (50.8%) Vs 3(6%)]; with p < 0.001. They required more ICU admissions: 10/79 (12.6%) Vs 1/85 (1.2%) with p=0.0036; and suffered more complications: 9/79 (11.4%) Vs 1/85 (1.2%) with p=0.0066; of Covid-19 infection, particularly in late pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women presented with fewer Covid-19 symptoms but ran a much more severe course of illness compared to non-pregnant women with the disease. They had worse chest radiograph scores and much higher levels of laboratory indicators of disease severity. They had more ICU admissions and suffered more complications of Covid-19 infection, such as risk for miscarriage and preterm deliveries. Pregnancy with Covid-19 infection, could, therefore, be categorised as high-risk pregnancy and requires management by an obstetric and medical multidisciplinary team.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , Premature Birth , Radiography, Thoracic , Symptom Assessment , Abortion, Spontaneous/epidemiology , Abortion, Spontaneous/etiology , C-Reactive Protein/analysis , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19/transmission , Case-Control Studies , Female , Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products/analysis , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical/prevention & control , Male , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/epidemiology , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/physiopathology , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/therapy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/virology , Pregnancy Outcome/epidemiology , Pregnancy, High-Risk , Premature Birth/epidemiology , Premature Birth/etiology , Radiography, Thoracic/methods , Radiography, Thoracic/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Severity of Illness Index , Symptom Assessment/methods , Symptom Assessment/statistics & numerical data , United Arab Emirates/epidemiology
15.
Contraception ; 110: 48-55, 2022 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1763674

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Travel restrictions, physical distancing and quarantine requirements, lockdowns, and stay-at-home orders due to COVID-19 have impacted abortion services across Canada. We aimed to explore the decision-making and care experiences of those who obtained abortion services during the COVID-19 pandemic and understand recent abortion patients' perspectives on demedicalized models of medication abortion service delivery. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted 23 semi-structured, in-depth interviews with women across Canada who obtained abortion care after March 15, 2020. We audio-recorded and transcribed the telephone/Skype/Zoom interviews and managed our data with ATLAS.ti. We analyzed the English-language interviews for content and themes using inductive and deductive techniques. RESULTS: The COVID-19 pandemic, and the associated economic and social support uncertainties, factored into many of our participants' decisions to obtain an abortion. Participants expressed relief and gratitude for being able to secure abortion care during the pandemic. Although women in our study reflected positively on their abortion care experiences, many felt that service delivery changes initiated because of the public health emergency exacerbated pre-COVID-19 barriers to care and contributed to feelings of loneliness and isolation. Our participants expressed considerable enthusiasm for demedicalized models of medication abortion care, including telemedicine services and behind-the-counter availability of mifepristone/misoprostol. CONCLUSIONS: For our participants, abortion care constituted an essential health service. Our findings demonstrate the importance of continuing to provide access to safe, effective, and timely abortion care during public health emergencies. Exploring additional models of demedicalized medication abortion service delivery to address persistent access barriers in Canada is warranted. IMPLICATIONS: Policymakers and clinicians should consider patient experiences as well as clinical evidence when considering regulatory changes to facilitate access to abortion care during public health emergencies. Identifying a multitude of ways to offer a full range of abortion services, including demedicalized models of medication abortion care, has the potential to meet significant needs in the COVID-19 era and beyond. The COVID pandemic highlights the need for demedicalized models, not only for the sake of those seeking abortion care but also to ease the burden on medical professionals during public health emergencies.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Induced , Abortion, Spontaneous , COVID-19 , Abortion, Induced/methods , Canada , Communicable Disease Control , Emergencies , Female , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Pandemics , Pregnancy
16.
Arch Immunol Ther Exp (Warsz) ; 70(1): 13, 2022 Mar 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1756768

ABSTRACT

Increased androgen level, hyperinsulinemia, diabetes, impaired fibrinolysis, obesity, hypertension, chronic inflammation, abnormal immune response to infections and hyperhomocysteinemia are the most common abnormalities related to polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) women and are the factors predisposing to the severe course of COVID-19. The SARS-Cov-2 infection during pregnancy is associated with an increased risk of complications (spontaneous abortion), similar to those in PCOS. The treatment of PCOS pregnant women with a history of fertility failures raises many doubts, especially during the COVID pandemic. However, due to the increasing incidence of infections among reproductive people and the potentially more serious course in pregnant women, numerous questions about the safety and effectiveness of the treatment are still very current. In our study we presented a series of cases of recurrent miscarriages or recurrent implantation failure PCOS pregnant women with confirmed COVID-19. The diagnosis of infertility confirmed the presence of plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 and/or 5,10-methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase polymorphisms in each of them. Moreover, some of the women presented immune dysfunction associated with infertility. We have described the personalized treatments of each pregnant patient included: metformin, enoxaparin and tacrolimus. The treatment applied had the expected effect, supporting the implantation processes. Furthermore, despite the ambiguous data according to immunological therapy of infertile women during the COVID pandemic, we observed a mild or asymptomatic COVID-19 course and we noticed no pregnancy complications.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Spontaneous , COVID-19 , Infertility, Female , Polycystic Ovary Syndrome , Abortion, Spontaneous/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Infertility, Female/complications , Infertility, Female/epidemiology , Infertility, Female/therapy , Pandemics , Polycystic Ovary Syndrome/complications , Polycystic Ovary Syndrome/epidemiology , Pregnancy , Pregnant Women , SARS-CoV-2
17.
JAMA Intern Med ; 182(5): 482-491, 2022 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1750266

ABSTRACT

Importance: Screening for medication abortion eligibility typically includes ultrasonography or pelvic examination. To reduce physical contact during the COVID-19 pandemic, many clinicians stopped requiring tests before medication abortion and instead screened patients for pregnancy duration and ectopic pregnancy risk by history alone. However, few US-based studies have been conducted on the outcomes and safety of this novel model of care. Objective: To evaluate the outcomes and safety of a history-based screening, no-test approach to medication abortion care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included patients obtaining a medication abortion without preabortion ultrasonography or pelvic examination between February 1, 2020, and January 31, 2021, at 14 independent, Planned Parenthood, academic-affiliated, and online-only clinics throughout the US. Exposures: Medications for abortion provided without preabortion ultrasonography or pelvic examination and dispensed to patients in person or by mail. Main Outcomes and Measures: Effectiveness, defined as complete abortion after 200 µg of mifepristone and up to 1600 µg of misoprostol without additional intervention, and major abortion-related adverse events, defined as hospital admission, major surgery, or blood transfusion. Results: The study included data on 3779 patients with eligible abortions. The study participants were racially and ethnically diverse and included 870 (23.0%) Black patients, 533 (14.1%) Latinx/Hispanic patients, 1623 (42.9%) White patients, and 327 (8.7%) who identified as multiracial or with other racial or ethnic groups. For most (2626 [69.5%]), it was their first medication abortion. Patients lived in 34 states, and 2785 (73.7%) lived in urban areas. In 2511 (66.4%) abortions, the medications were dispensed in person; in the other 1268 (33.6%), they were mailed to the patient. Follow-up data were obtained for 2825 abortions (74.8%), and multiple imputation was used to account for missing data. Across the sample, 12 abortions (0.54%; 95% CI, 0.18%-0.90%) were followed by major abortion-related adverse events, and 4 patients (0.22%; 95% CI, 0.00%-0.45%) were treated for ectopic pregnancies. Follow-up identified 9 (0.40%; 95% CI, 0.00%-0.84%) patients who had pregnancy durations of greater than 70 days on the date the mifepristone was dispensed that were not identified at screening. The adjusted effectiveness rate was 94.8% (95% CI, 93.6%-95.9%). Effectiveness was similar when medications were dispensed in person (95.4%; 95% CI, 94.1%-96.7%) or mailed (93.3%; 95% CI, 90.7%-95.9%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, screening for medication abortion eligibility by history alone was effective and safe with either in-person dispensing or mailing of medications, resulting in outcomes similar to published rates of models involving ultrasonography or pelvic examination. This approach may facilitate more equitable access to this essential service by increasing the types of clinicians and locations offering abortion care.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Induced , Abortion, Spontaneous , COVID-19 , Pregnancy, Ectopic , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Mifepristone/therapeutic use , Pandemics , Pregnancy , Retrospective Studies
18.
BMJ Sex Reprod Health ; 48(1): 22-27, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1736080

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Routine ultrasound may be used in abortion services to determine gestational age and confirm an intrauterine pregnancy. However, ultrasound adds complexity to care and results may be inconclusive, delaying abortion. We sought to determine the rate of ectopic pregnancy and the utility of routine ultrasound in its detection, in a community abortion service. METHODS: Retrospective case record review of women requesting abortion over a 5-year period (2015-2019) with an outcome of ectopic pregnancy or pregnancy of unknown location (PUL) at a service (Edinburgh, UK) conducting routine ultrasound on all women. Records were searched for symptoms at presentation, development of symptoms during clinical care, significant risk factors and routine ultrasound findings. RESULTS: Only 29/11 381 women (0.25%, 95% CI 0.18%, 0.33%) had an ectopic pregnancy or PUL (tubal=18, caesarean scar=1, heterotopic=1, PUL=9). Eleven (38%) cases had either symptoms at presentation (n=8) and/or significant risk factors for ectopic pregnancy (n=4). A further 12 women developed symptoms during their clinical care. Of the remaining six, three were PUL treated with methotrexate and three were ectopic (salpingectomy=2, methotrexate=1). In three cases, the baseline ultrasound indicated a probable early intrauterine pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: Ectopic pregnancies are uncommon among women presenting for abortion. The value of routine ultrasound in excluding ectopic pregnancy in symptom-free women without significant risk factors is questionable as it may aid detection of some cases but may provide false reassurance that a pregnancy is intrauterine.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Induced , Abortion, Spontaneous , Pregnancy, Ectopic , Abortion, Induced/adverse effects , Abortion, Spontaneous/diagnostic imaging , Abortion, Spontaneous/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Pregnancy, Ectopic/diagnostic imaging , Pregnancy, Ectopic/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Ultrasonography
19.
Contraception ; 110: 56-60, 2022 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1719564

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the proportion of medication versus suction aspiration abortions before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in a health system that did not limit access to abortion. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted an interrupted time series analysis among patients having an abortion at 10 weeks gestation or less at Planned Parenthood health centers in San Diego, Imperial, and Riverside Counties in California. Centers required in-person follow up for medication abortion throughout the pandemic. We compared the nine months prior to the pandemic (June 2019 to February 2020) to the first nine months of the pandemic (April 2020 to December 2020), with March 2020 as a washout period. RESULTS: There was an average monthly increase of 0.78% in the proportion of medication abortions from June 2019 to February 2020 (p = 0.01, pre-pandemic trend). Immediately following the start of the pandemic, there was an estimated increase in the proportion of medication abortions of 2.58% (p = 0.23, post-level change). However, the monthly pre-pandemic trend towards medication abortions reversed by 1.07% after the start of the pandemic (p = 0.02, post-trend change), for an average monthly decrease in the proportion of medication abortions of 0.29% from April to December 2020 (p = 0.37, pandemic trend). CONCLUSIONS: The trend towards medication abortions that was present before the COVID-19 pandemic reversed after an initial increase in medication abortions at the start of the pandemic. IMPLICATIONS: Both types of abortion should remain available during public health emergencies. Further research is needed to understand how the pandemic affected abortion methods in areas with limited access and in health centers that did not require two in-person appointments for medication abortions.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Induced , Abortion, Spontaneous , COVID-19 , Abortion, Legal , California/epidemiology , Female , Gestational Age , Humans , Pandemics , Pregnancy
20.
New Bioeth ; 28(1): 1-3, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1700783
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL