Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 43
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
1.
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol ; 268: 135-142, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1616477

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Selection, outcome and publication biases are well described in case reports and case series but may be less of a problem early in the appearance of a new disease when all cases might appear to be worth publishing. OBJECTIVE: To use a prospectively collected database of primary sources to compare the reporting of COVID-19 in pregnancy in case reports, case series and in registries over the first 8 months of the pandemic. STUDY DESIGN: MEDLINE, Embase and Maternity and Infant Care databases were searched from 22 March to 5 November 2020, to create a curated list of primary sources. Duplicate reports were excluded. Case reports, case series and registry studies of pregnant women with confirmed COVID-19, where neonatal outcomes were reported, were selected and data extracted on neonatal infection status, neonatal death, neonatal intensive care unit admission, preterm birth, stillbirth, maternal critical care unit admission and maternal death. RESULTS: 149 studies comprising 41,658 mothers and 8,854 neonates were included. All complications were more common in case reports, and in retrospective series compared with presumably prospective registry studies. Extensive overlap is likely in registry studies, with cases from seven countries reported by multiple registries. The UK Obstetric Surveillance System was the only registry to explicitly report identification and removal of duplicate cases, although five other registries reported collection of patient identifiable data which would facilitate identification of duplicates. CONCLUSIONS: Since it is likely that registries provide the least biased estimates, the higher rates seen in the other two study designs are probably due to selection or publication bias. However even some registry studies include self- or doctor-reported cases, so might be biased, and we could not completely exclude overlap of cases in some registries.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Premature Birth , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Outcome/epidemiology , Registries , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Stillbirth/epidemiology
2.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(47): 1640-1645, 2021 Nov 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1534934

ABSTRACT

Pregnant women are at increased risk for severe COVID-19-related illness, and COVID-19 is associated with an increased risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes and maternal and neonatal complications (1-3). To date, studies assessing whether COVID-19 during pregnancy is associated with increased risk for stillbirth have yielded mixed results (2-4). Since the B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) became the predominant circulating variant,* there have been anecdotal reports of increasing rates of stillbirths in women with COVID-19.† CDC used the Premier Healthcare Database Special COVID-19 Release (PHD-SR), a large hospital-based administrative database,§ to assess whether a maternal COVID-19 diagnosis documented at delivery hospitalization was associated with stillbirth during March 2020-September 2021 as well as before and during the period of Delta variant predominance in the United States (March 2020-June 2021 and July-September 2021, respectively). Among 1,249,634 deliveries during March 2020-September 2021, stillbirths were rare (8,154; 0.65%): 273 (1.26%) occurred among 21,653 deliveries to women with COVID-19 documented at the delivery hospitalization, and 7,881 (0.64%) occurred among 1,227,981 deliveries without COVID-19. The adjusted risk for stillbirth was higher in deliveries with COVID-19 compared with deliveries without COVID-19 during March 2020-September 2021 (adjusted relative risk [aRR] = 1.90; 95% CI = 1.69-2.15), including during the pre-Delta (aRR = 1.47; 95% CI = 1.27-1.71) and Delta periods (aRR = 4.04; 95% CI = 3.28-4.97). COVID-19 documented at delivery was associated with increased risk for stillbirth, with a stronger association during the period of Delta variant predominance. Implementing evidence-based COVID-19 prevention strategies, including vaccination before or during pregnancy, is critical to reducing the impact of COVID-19 on stillbirths.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/epidemiology , Stillbirth/epidemiology , Adult , Delivery, Obstetric , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Pregnancy , Risk Assessment , United States/epidemiology
3.
Clin Ter ; 172(6): 570-576, 2021 Nov 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1534517

ABSTRACT

Introduction: COVID-19 is a complex syndrome caused by SARS-Cov-2. It mainly affects the respiratory system, but it could cause serious harm during pregnancy. An increase in stillbirths and preterm births has been highlighted by many authors. Although WHO and Royal College of Obstetrics and Gynecology don't recommend elective cesarean section in women with confirmed infection, cesarean sections were performed by many clinicians. This short narrative review aims to analyze pieces of evidence found in literature about the effectiveness of cesarean section in preventing stillbirths in COVID-19 positive mothers. Methods: Studies included in the present review were retrieved searching MEDLINE (last access August 5th, 2021) with the following keywords: "pregnant woman with covid-19", "Caesarean section", "Ab-dominal Delivery" and "Stillbirth". Studies regarding the mode of delive-ry in pregnant women infected with COVID-19 and neonatal outcomes were included. Studies about biology, anesthesiology and necroscopy were excluded. Filters for "human" and "English" were applied. Results: Searching MEDLINE, 24 references were found. Other 103 articles were found searching bibliography. Two references were excluded after duplicate removal, 77 references after the title screen and 27 after the abstract screen. The final number of references included was 23. Most of the included studies were case reports. Most of them were from China. Discussion: Many authors highlighted the increased risk of fetal death in pregnancies complicated with SARS-Cov-2 infection, but it is not clear if Caesarean Section could reduce this risk. Pieces of evidence show that most clinicians choose to perform an elective cesarean section mostly because of maternal conditions or the fear of possible vertical transmission. Data show that mode of delivery doesn't affect the neonatal outcome and Caesarean Section doesn't reduce the positivity rate among neonates. Different opinions were found about the possible infection of amniotic fluid, cord blood and placenta. The risk of vertical transmission is considered moderate or low by most of the authors. Positivity to SARS-Cov-2 isn't an indication of elective cesarean section by itself, but this mode of delivery should be optioned in patients with other obstetrical indications or with severe conditions due to COVID. The recent increase in stillbirths could be related to the overall deterioration of maternal conditions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , Cesarean Section , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical , Pregnancy , SARS-CoV-2 , Stillbirth/epidemiology
4.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ; 21(1): 761, 2021 Nov 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1511730

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The ongoing spread coronavirus disease worldwide has caused major disruptions and led to lockdowns. Everyday lifestyle changes and antenatal care inaccessibility during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have variable results that affect pregnancy outcomes. This study aimed to assess the alterations in stillbirth, neonatal-perinatal mortality, preterm birth, and birth weight during the COVID-19 national lockdown. METHODS: We used the data from the Jordan stillbirths and neonatal death surveillance system to compare pregnancy outcomes (gestational age, birth weight, small for gestational age, stillbirth, neonatal death, and perinatal death) between two studied periods (11 months before the pandemic (May 2019 to March 2020) vs. 9 months during the pandemic (April 2020 to March 1st 2020). Separate multinomial logistic and binary logistic regression models were used to compare the studied outcomes between the two studied periods after adjusting for the effects of mother's age, income, education, occupation, nationality, health sector, and multiplicity. RESULTS: There were 31106 registered babies during the study period; among them, 15311 (49.2%) and 15795 (50.8%) births occurred before and during the COVID-19 lockdown, respectively. We found no significant differences in preterm birth and stillbirth rates, neonatal mortality, or perinatal mortality before and during the COVID-19 lockdown. Our findings report a significantly lower incidence of extreme low birth weight (ELBW) infants (<1kg) during the COVID-19 lockdown period than that before the lockdown (adjusted OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.3-0.5: P value <0.001) CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 lockdown period, the number of infants born with extreme low birth weight (ELBW) decreased significantly. More research is needed to determine the impact of cumulative socio-environmental and maternal behavioral changes that occurred during the pandemic on the factors that contribute to ELBW infants.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/epidemiology , Pregnancy Outcome/epidemiology , Adult , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant Mortality , Infant, Newborn , Infant, Small for Gestational Age , Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical/statistics & numerical data , Jordan , Perinatal Mortality , Pregnancy , Premature Birth/epidemiology , Stillbirth/epidemiology
6.
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol ; 58(5): 677-687, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1491008

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of restriction measures implemented to mitigate severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on pregnancy duration and outcome. METHODS: A before-and-after study was conducted with cohort sampling in three maternity hospitals in Melbourne, Australia, including women who were pregnant when restriction measures were in place during the COVID-19 pandemic (estimated conception date between 1 November 2019 and 29 February 2020) and women who were pregnant before the restrictions (estimated conception date between 1 November 2018 and 28 February 2019). The primary outcome was delivery before 34 weeks' gestation or stillbirth. The main secondary outcome was a composite of adverse perinatal outcomes. Pregnancy outcomes were compared between women exposed to restriction measures and unexposed controls using the χ-square test and modified Poisson regression models, and duration of pregnancy was compared between the groups using survival analysis. RESULTS: In total, 3150 women who were exposed to restriction measures during pregnancy and 3175 unexposed controls were included. Preterm birth before 34 weeks or stillbirth occurred in 95 (3.0%) exposed pregnancies and in 130 (4.1%) controls (risk ratio (RR), 0.74 (95% CI, 0.57-0.96); P = 0.021). Preterm birth before 34 weeks occurred in 2.4% of women in the exposed group and in 3.4% of women in the control group (RR, 0.71 (95% CI, 0.53-0.95); P = 0.022), without evidence of an increase in the rate of stillbirth in the exposed group (0.7% vs 0.9%; RR, 0.83 (95% CI, 0.48-1.44); P = 0.515). Competing-risks regression analysis showed that the effect of the restriction measures on spontaneous preterm birth was stronger and started earlier (subdistribution hazard ratio (HR), 0.81 (95% CI, 0.64-1.03); P = 0.087) than the effect on medically indicated preterm birth (subdistribution HR, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.70-1.12); P = 0.305). The effect was stronger in women with a previous preterm birth (RR, 0.42 (95% CI, 0.21-0.82); P = 0.008) than in parous women without a previous preterm birth (RR, 0.93 (95% CI, 0.63-1.38); P = 0.714) (P for interaction = 0.044). Composite adverse perinatal outcome was less frequent in the exposed group than in controls (all women: 2.1% vs 2.9%; RR, 0.73 (95% CI, 0.54-0.99); P = 0.042); women with a previous preterm birth: 4.5% vs 8.4%; RR, 0.54 (95% CI, 0.25-1.18); P = 0.116). CONCLUSIONS: Restriction measures implemented to mitigate SARS-CoV-2 transmission during the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with a reduced rate of preterm birth before 34 weeks. This reduction was mainly due to a lower rate of spontaneous prematurity. The effect was more substantial in women with a previous preterm birth and was not associated with an increased stillbirth rate. © 2021 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Infection Control/methods , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pregnancy Outcome/epidemiology , Adult , Australia/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Infant, Low Birth Weight , Infant, Newborn , Physical Distancing , Pregnancy , Premature Birth/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Stillbirth/epidemiology , Young Adult
7.
Health Aff (Millwood) ; 40(11): 1797-1805, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1477546

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has put severe pressure on health care systems worldwide. Although attention has been focused on COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths, some experts have warned about potentially devastating secondary health effects. These effects may be most severe in low- and middle-income countries with already weak health care systems. This study examines the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on early infant deaths, a question that is currently unsettled. We present new evidence from Nigeria showing that early infant deaths have significantly increased during the pandemic. Using data on the birth outcomes of a large and diverse cohort of pregnant women enrolled in a prospective study and a quasi-experimental difference-in-differences design, we found a 1.1-percentage-point (22 percent) increase and a 0.72-percentage-point (23 percent) increase, respectively, in stillbirths and newborn deaths. Our findings show that the health effects of the pandemic extend beyond counted COVID-19 deaths. If these findings generalize to other low- and middle-income countries, they may indicate that the hard-won gains in child survival made during the past two decades are at risk of being reversed amid the ongoing pandemic. Policies addressing disruptions to health services delivery and providing support to vulnerable groups-specifically to households with pregnant women-will be critical as the pandemic continues.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Child , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Nigeria/epidemiology , Pregnancy , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Stillbirth/epidemiology
8.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ; 21(1): 676, 2021 Oct 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1455946

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Since the emergence of COVID-19, preventative public health measures, including lockdown strategies, were declared in most countries to control viral transmission. Recent studies and anecdotes have reported changes in the prevalence of perinatal outcomes during national COVID-19lockdowns.The objective of this rapid review was to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 lockdowns on the incidence of low birth weight (LBW), preterm birth (PTB), and stillbirth. METHODS: Two reviewers searched EMBASE, CORD-19, LitCovid (PubMed), WHO Global research on corona virus disease (COVID-19), and MedRxiv for studies published in English from the first reports on COVID-19 until 17 July 2021. Perinatal outcomes of interest included LBW (< 2500 g), PTB (< 37 weeks), and stillbirth. RESULTS: Of the 1967 screened articles, 17 publications met the inclusion criteria (14 cohort studies, 1 case control and 2 cross-sectional studies). Studies included data from Denmark, UK, Ireland, Nepal, Italy, Israel, Botswana, Australia, China, Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, Austria, Zimbabwe, India, and Spain. The total sample size ranged from 3399 to 1,599,547 pregnant women. Thirteen studies examined PTB with conflicting results, reporting both an increase and a decrease in PTB incidence, with odds ratios [95% CI] ranging from 0.09 [0.01, 0.40] to 1.93 [0.76, 4.79]. Three studies found a decrease in LBW rates during lockdowns, one of which was statistically significant, with a rate ratio of 3.77 [1.21, 11.75]. Ten studies examined stillbirth rates, including four studies reporting a statistically significant increase in stillbirth rates, with adjusted relative risk ranging from 1.46 [1.13, 1.89] to 3.9 [1.83, 12.0]. Fourteen studies contained data that could be combined in a meta-analysis comparing perinatal outcomes before and during lockdown. We found that lockdown measures were associated with a significant risk of stillbirth with RR = 1.33 [95% CI 1.04, 1.69] when compared to before lockdown period. However, lockdown measures were not associated with a significant risk of PTB, LBW and VLBW compared to prepandemic periods. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides clues about the severity of the indirect influence of COVID-19 lockdown implementation; however, the criteria that lead to unexpected changes in LBW, PTB, and stillbirth remains unclear. Large studies showed conflicting results, reporting both increases and decreases in selected perinatal outcomes. Pooled results show a significant association between lockdown measures and stillbirth rates, but not low birth weight rates. Further studies examining the differences in other countries' lockdowns and sociodemographic groups from low to middle-income countries are needed. Exploration of perinatal outcomes during COVID-19 lockdown poses an opportunity to learn from and make changes to promote the reduction of the leading causes of childhood mortality worldwide.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Infant, Low Birth Weight , Pregnancy Outcome/epidemiology , Premature Birth/epidemiology , Quarantine , Stillbirth/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Incidence , Odds Ratio , Pregnancy , SARS-CoV-2
10.
Placenta ; 109: 72-74, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1386464

ABSTRACT

Whether early SARS-CoV-2 definitively increases the risk of stillbirth is unknown, though studies have suggested possible trends of stillbirth increase during the pandemic. This study of third trimester stillbirth does not identify an increase in rates during the first wave of the pandemic period, however investigation of the placental pathology demonstrates trends towards more vascular placental abnormalities.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Placenta Diseases/epidemiology , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/epidemiology , Pregnancy Trimester, Third , Stillbirth/epidemiology , Adult , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/mortality , Cause of Death , Female , Fetal Death/etiology , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , Placenta/pathology , Placenta Diseases/etiology , Placenta Diseases/pathology , Placenta Diseases/virology , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/mortality , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
13.
CMAJ ; 193(30): E1164-E1172, 2021 08 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1352715

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Conflicting reports have emerged for rates of preterm births and stillbirths during the COVID-19 pandemic. Most of these reports did not account for natural variation in these rates. We aimed to evaluate variations in preterm birth and stillbirth rates before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using linked population health administrative databases of pregnant people giving birth in any hospital in Ontario between July 2002 and December 2020. We calculated preterm birth and stillbirth rates. We assessed preterm birth at 22-28, 29-32 and 33-36 weeks' gestation, and stillbirths at term and preterm gestation. We used Laney control P' charts for the 18-year study period (6-mo observation periods) and interrupted time-series analyses for monthly rates for the most recent 4 years. RESULTS: We evaluated 2 465 387 pregnancies, including 13 781 that resulted in stillbirth. The mean preterm birth rate for our cohort was 7.96% (range 7.32%-8.59%). From January to December 2020, we determined that the preterm birth rate in Ontario was 7.87%, with no special cause variation. The mean stillbirth rate for the cohort was 0.56% (range 0.48%-0.70%). From January to December 2020, the stillbirth rate was 0.53%, with no special cause variation. We did not find any special cause variation for preterm birth or stillbirth subgroups. We found no changes in slope or gap between prepandemic and pandemic periods using interrupted time-series analyses. INTERPRETATION: In Ontario, Canada, we found no special cause variation (unusual change) in preterm birth or stillbirth rates, overall or by subgroups, during the first 12 months of the COVID-19 pandemic compared with the previous 17.5 years.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Infant Mortality/trends , Premature Birth/epidemiology , Stillbirth/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Comorbidity , Female , Gestational Age , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Infant, Premature , Interrupted Time Series Analysis , Ontario , Pregnancy , Retrospective Studies
14.
Int J Gynaecol Obstet ; 155(3): 483-489, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1318712

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To examine possible changes in the rate of stillbirths in Germany during the first COVID-19 lockdown. METHODS: Population-level data of live births and stillbirths occurring between January 1995 and July 2020 were used and negative binomial regression was applied to estimate the rate of stillbirths in this period. The actual rate was compared to the expected figure for 2020. RESULTS: A steady increase in stillbirths was detected in Germany since 2013. The stillbirth rate for January to July 2020 (4.148) was slightly lower than that of the same period in 2019 (4.242). Furthermore, all monthly rates of stillbirths during the first half of 2020 lie inside the 95% prediction interval of expected stillbirth rates for this period. CONCLUSION: A growing body of studies on the indirect effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on stillbirths shows mixed and context-dependent evidence. In contrast to other European countries, stillbirth rates have been on the rise in Germany in the last decade. However, stillbirth rates during the first half of 2020 were not higher than expected. The results suggest that stillbirth rates have not changed during the first-wave COVID-19 lockdown in this high-income setting. However, further studies on the causes of the increasing trend in stillbirths in Germany are needed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Stillbirth , Communicable Disease Control , Female , Germany/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , Pregnancy , SARS-CoV-2 , Stillbirth/epidemiology
15.
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol ; 264: 41-48, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1300750

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the influence of ABO and Rh blood groups on morbidity among SARS-CoV-2 infected pregnancies. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: 78 centers of the Spanish Obstetric Emergency Group. POPULATION: Pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 tested with polymerase-chain-reaction between 26-February and 5-November 2020. A cohort of 1278 SARS-CoV-2(+) pregnant women was analyzed and a concurrent comparison group of 1453 SARS-COV-2(-) patients was established. METHODS: Data were collected from medical charts. SARS-COV-2(+) was compared with SARS-COV-2(-) for differences in distribution of blood groups. We performed multivariate analysis, controlling for maternal age and ethnicity, to evaluate association of ABO and Rh blood groups with maternal and perinatal outcomes in SARS-CoV-2(+) patients with adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Medical morbidity: Symptomatic COVID-19 and medical complications. Obstetric outcomes: caesarean delivery, preterm deliveries, preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM), hemorrhagic events, pre-eclampsia, maternal and neonatal mortality, stillbirth. RESULTS: Differences were noted between blood types and Rh for age and ethnicity comparing SARS-CoV-2(+) and SARS-CoV-2(-) groups (p < 0.05). Among the SARS-CoV-2(+) cohort, the odds of symptomatic COVID-19 and obstetric hemorrhagic event were higher in Rh+ vs Rh- mothers (aOR 1.48, 95% CI 1.02-2.14, p = 0.037, and aOR 8.72, 95% CI 1.20-63.57, p = 0.033, respectively), and PPROM were higher among blood type A vs non-A mothers (aOR 2.06, 95% CI 1.01-4.18, p = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS: In SARS-CoV-2(+) pregnant women, Rh- status was associated with a lower risk of symptomatic COVID-19, while Rh+ and blood group A were associated with obstetric hemorrhage and PPROM, respectively.


Subject(s)
Blood Group Antigens , COVID-19 , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , Premature Birth , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical , Multivariate Analysis , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Outcome/epidemiology , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Stillbirth/epidemiology
17.
PLoS One ; 16(6): e0253796, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1282315

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have demonstrated an increased stillbirth rate. It was suggested that the COVID-19 pandemic may have impacted on attendances for reduced fetal movements. Thus, we sought to ascertain the impact of the pandemic on attendances for reduced fetal movements (RFM) in our unit, ultrasound provision for reduced fetal movements, and the stillbirth rate. METHODS: This was a single site retrospective cohort study involving all women complaining of a 1st episode of reduced fetal movements between 01/03/2020-30/04/2020 (COVID) to 01/03/2019-30/04/2019 (Pre-COVID). Data were retrieved from computerised hospital records and statistical analyses were performed using GraphPad Prism and SPSS. RESULTS: 22% (179/810) of women presented with a 1st episode of reduced fetal movements Pre-COVID compared to 18% (145/803) during COVID (p = 0.047). Primiparous women were significantly over-represented in this population with a 1.4-fold increase in attendances during COVID (67% vs 48%, p = 0.0005). Neither the total stillbirth rate nor the stillbirth rate amongst women who presented with reduced fetal movements changed during COVID. Ultrasound provision was not impacted by COVID with 95% of the scans performed according to local guidelines, compared to Pre-COVID (74%, p = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant decrease in 1st attendances for reduced fetal movements during COVID-19 pandemic. Primiparous women were 1.4 times more likely to attend with RFM. Women should be reassured that COVID-19 has not resulted in a decreased provision of care for RFM, and has not impacted on the stillbirth rate.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Fetal Growth Retardation , Fetal Movement , SARS-CoV-2 , Stillbirth/epidemiology , Ultrasonography, Prenatal , Adult , Female , Fetal Growth Retardation/diagnostic imaging , Fetal Growth Retardation/epidemiology , Gestational Age , Humans , Pregnancy , Retrospective Studies
19.
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand ; 100(10): 1756-1770, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1258895

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Conflicting reports of increases and decreases in rates of preterm birth (PTB) and stillbirth in the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic have surfaced. The objective of our study was to conduct a living systematic review and meta-analyses of studies reporting pregnancy and neonatal outcomes by comparing the pandemic and pre-pandemic periods. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We searched PubMed and Embase databases, reference lists of articles published up until 14 May 2021 and included English language studies that compared outcomes between the COVID-19 pandemic time period and pre-pandemic time periods. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis using the inverse variance method. RESULTS: Thirty-seven studies with low-to-moderate risk of bias, reporting on 1 677 858 pregnancies during the pandemic period and 21 028 650 pregnancies during the pre-pandemic period, were included. There was a significant reduction in unadjusted estimates of PTB (28 studies, unadjusted odds ratio [uaOR] 0.94, 95% confidence [CI] 0.91-0.98) but not in adjusted estimates (six studies, adjusted OR [aOR] 0.95, 95% CI 0.80-1.13). The reduction was noted in studies from single centers/health areas (uaOR 0.90, 95% CI 0.86-0.94) but not in regional/national studies (uaOR 0.99, 95% CI 0.95-1.03). There was reduction in spontaneous PTB (five studies, uaOR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.98) and induced PTB (four studies, uaOR 0.90, 95% CI 0.81-1.00). There was no reduction in PTB when stratified by gestational age <34, <32 or <28 weeks. There was no difference in stillbirths between the pandemic and pre-pandemic time periods (21 studies, uaOR 1.08, 95% CI 0.94-1.23; four studies, aOR 1.06, 95% CI 0.81-1.38). There was an increase in birthweight (six studies, mean difference 17 g, 95% CI 7-28 g) during the pandemic period. There was an increase in maternal mortality (four studies, uaOR 1.15, 95% CI 1.05-1.26), which was mostly influenced by one study from Mexico. There was significant publication bias for the outcome of PTB. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic time period may be associated with a reduction in PTB; however, referral bias cannot be excluded. There was no difference in stillbirth between the pandemic and pre-pandemic period.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Pregnancy Outcome/epidemiology , Premature Birth/epidemiology , Stillbirth/epidemiology , Causality , Female , Global Health , Humans , Infant, Low Birth Weight , Infant, Newborn , Pregnancy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...