Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 infection.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine whether severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in pregnancy is associated with an increased risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP). METHODS: A multicenter retrospective cohort study of all pregnant patients who had SARS-CoV-2 testing and delivered in a large health system between March 2020 and March 2021. Cases were stratified into two groups: patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during pregnancy vs. patients who tested negative. The primary outcome of HDP, defined as a composite of gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, and low platelet count syndrome (HELLP Syndrome), and eclampsia by standard criteria, was compared between the two groups. Statistical analysis included multivariable logistic regression to adjust for potential confounders such as maternal demographics and comorbidities. Patient ZIP codes were linked to neighborhood-level data from the US Census Bureau's American Community Survey. RESULTS: Of the 22,438 patients included, 1,653 (7.4%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Baseline demographics such as age, body mass index, race, ethnicity, insurance type, neighborhood-built environmental and socioeconomic status, nulliparity, and pregestational diabetes differed significantly between the two groups. SARS-CoV- 2 infection in pregnancy was not associated with an increased risk of HDP compared to those without infection (14.9 vs. 14.8%; aOR 1.06 95% CI 0.90-1.24). CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort that included a universally-tested population with several socioeconomic indicators, SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy was not associated with an increased risk of HDP.

The Risk of Readmission after Early Postpartum Discharge during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether early postpartum discharge during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was associated with a change in the odds of maternal postpartum readmissions. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective analysis of uncomplicated postpartum low-risk women in seven obstetrical units within a large New York health system. We compared the rate of postpartum readmissions within 6 weeks of delivery between two groups: low-risk women who had early postpartum discharge as part of our protocol during the COVID-19 pandemic (April 1-June 15, 2020) and similar low-risk patients with routine postpartum discharge from the same study centers 1 year prior. Statistical analysis included the use of Wilcoxon's rank-sum and chi-squared tests, Nelson-Aalen cumulative hazard curves, and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 8,206 patients included, 4,038 (49.2%) were patients who had early postpartum discharge during the COVID-19 pandemic and 4,168 (50.8%) were patients with routine postpartum discharge prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. The rates of postpartum readmissions after vaginal delivery (1.0 vs. 0.9%; adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.39-1.45) and cesarean delivery (1.5 vs. 1.9%; adjusted OR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.29-1.45) were similar between the two groups. Demographic risk factors for postpartum readmission included Medicaid insurance and obesity. CONCLUSION: Early postpartum discharge during the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with no change in the odds of maternal postpartum readmissions after low-risk vaginal or cesarean deliveries. Early postpartum discharge for low-risk patients to shorten hospital length of stay should be considered in the face of public health crises. KEY POINTS: · Early postpartum discharge was not associated with an increase in odds of hospital readmissions after vaginal delivery.. · Early postpartum discharge was not associated with an increase in odds of hospital readmissions after cesarean delivery.. · Early postpartum discharge for low-risk patients should be considered during a public health crisis..

Ethical challenges in management of critically ill pregnant patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Despite the overwhelming number of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases worldwide, data regarding the optimal clinical guidance in pregnant patients is not uniform or well established. As a result, clinical decisions to optimize maternal and fetal benefit, particularly in patients with critical COVID-19 in the early preterm period, continue to be a challenge for obstetricians. There is often uncertainty in clinical judgment about fetal monitoring, timing of delivery, and mode of delivery because of the challenge in balancing maternal and fetal interests in reducing morbidity and mortality. The obstetrician and critical care team should empower pregnant patients or their surrogate decision maker to make informed decisions in response to the team's clinical evaluation. A clinically grounded ethical framework, based on the concepts of the moral management of medical uncertainty, beneficence-based obligations, and preventive ethics, should guide the decision-making process.

Professionally responsible coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination counseling of obstetrical and gynecologic patients.

The development of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines in the current and planned clinical trials is essential for the success of a public health response. This paper focuses on how physicians should implement the results of these clinical trials when counseling patients who are pregnant, planning to become pregnant, breastfeeding or planning to breastfeed about vaccines with government authorization for clinical use. Determining the most effective approach to counsel patients about coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination is challenging. We address the professionally responsible counseling of 3 groups of patients-those who are pregnant, those planning to become pregnant, and those breastfeeding or planning to breastfeed. We begin with an evidence-based account of the following 5 major challenges: the limited evidence base, the documented increased risk for severe disease among pregnant coronavirus disease 2019-infected patients, conflicting guidance from government agencies and professional associations, false information about coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines, and maternal mistrust and vaccine hesitancy. We subsequently provide evidence-based, ethically justified, practical guidance for meeting these challenges in the professionally responsible counseling of patients about coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination. To guide the professionally responsible counseling of patients who are pregnant, planning to become pregnant, and breastfeeding or planning to breastfeed, we explain how obstetrician-gynecologists should evaluate the current clinical information, why a recommendation of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination should be made, and how this assessment should be presented to patients during the informed consent process with the goal of empowering them to make informed decisions. We also present a proactive account of how to respond when patients refuse the recommended vaccination, including the elements of the legal obligation of informed refusal and the ethical obligation to ask patients to reconsider. During this process, the physician should be alert to vaccine hesitancy, ask patients to express their hesitation and reasons for it, and respectfully address them. In contrast to the conflicting guidance from government agencies and professional associations, evidence-based professional ethics in obstetrics and gynecology provides unequivocal and clear guidance: Physicians should recommend coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination to patients who are pregnant, planning to become pregnant, and breastfeeding or planning to breastfeed. To prevent widening of the health inequities, build trust in the health benefits of vaccination, and encourage coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine and treatment uptake, in addition to recommending coronavirus disease 2019 vaccinations, physicians should engage with communities to tailor strategies to overcome mistrust and deliver evidence-based information, robust educational campaigns, and novel approaches to immunization.

How fever is defined in COVID-19 publications: a disturbing lack of precision.

OBJECTIVES: Fever is the single most frequently reported manifestation of COVID-19 and is a critical element of screening persons for COVID-19. The meaning of "fever" varies depending on the cutoff temperature used, the type of thermometer, the time of the day, the site of measurements, and the person's gender and race. The absence of a universally accepted definition for fever has been especially problematic during the current COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This investigation determined the extent to which fever is defined in COVID-19 publications, with special attention to those associated with pregnancy. RESULTS: Of 53 publications identified in which "fever" is reported as a manifestation of COVID-19 illness, none described the method used to measure patient's temperatures. Only 10 (19%) publications specified the minimum temperature used to define a fever with values that varied from a 37.3 °C (99.1 °F) to 38.1 °C (100.6 °F). CONCLUSIONS: There is a disturbing lack of precision in defining fever in COVID-19 publications. Given the many factors influencing temperature measurements in humans, there can never be a single, universally accepted temperature cut-off defining a fever. This clinical reality should not prevent precision in reporting fever. To achieve the precision and improve scientific and clinical communication, when fever is reported in clinical investigations, at a minimum the cut-off temperature used in determining the presence of fever, the anatomical site at which temperatures are taken, and the instrument used to measure temperatures should each be described. In the absence of such information, what is meant by the term "fever" is uncertain.

Early postpartum discharge during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objectives To report our experience with early postpartum discharge to decrease hospital length of stay among low-risk puerperium patients in a large obstetrical service during the COVID-19 pandemic in New York. Methods Retrospective analysis of all uncomplicated postpartum women in seven obstetrical units within a large health system between December 8th, 2019 and June 20th, 2020. Women were stratified into two groups based on date of delivery in relation to the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in New York (Mid-March 2020); those delivering before or during the COVID-19 pandemic. We compared hospital length of stay, defined as time interval from delivery to discharge in hours, between the two groups and correlated it with the number of COVID-19 admissions to our hospitals. Statistical analysis included use of Wilcoxon rank sum test and Chi-squared test with significance defined as p-value<0.05. Results Of the 11,770 patients included, 5,893 (50.1%) delivered prior to and 5,877 (49.9%) delivered during the COVID-19 pandemic. We detected substantial shortening in postpartum hospital length of stay after vaginal delivery (34 vs. 48 h, p≤0.0001) and cesarean delivery (51 vs. 74 h, p≤0.0001) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusions We report successful implementation of early postpartum discharge for low-risk patients resulting in a significantly shorter hospital stay during the COVID-19 pandemic in New York. The impact of this strategy on resource utilization, patient satisfaction and adverse outcomes requires further study.

Professionally responsible advocacy for women and children first during the COVID-19 pandemic: guidance from World Association of Perinatal Medicine and International Academy of Perinatal Medicine.

The goal of perinatal medicine is to provide professionally responsible clinical management of the conditions and diagnoses of pregnant, fetal, and neonatal patients. The New York Declaration of the International Academy of Perinatal Medicine, "Women and children First - or Last?" was directed toward the ethical challenges of perinatal medicine in middle-income and low-income countries. The global COVID-19 pandemic presents common ethical challenges in all countries, independent of their national wealth. In this paper the World Association of Perinatal Medicine provides ethics-based guidance for professionally responsible advocacy for women and children first during the COVID-19 pandemic. We first present an ethical framework that explains ethical reasoning, clinically relevant ethical principles and professional virtues, and decision making with pregnant patients and parents. We then apply this ethical framework to evidence-based treatment and its improvement, planned home birth, ring-fencing obstetric services, attendance of spouse or partner at birth, and the responsible management of organizational resources. Perinatal physicians should focus on the mission of perinatal medicine to put women and children first and frame-shifting when necessary to put the lives and health of the population of patients served by a hospital first.

Clinical Implications of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in the Viable Preterm Period.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the rate of preterm birth (PTB) during hospitalization among women diagnosed with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) between 23 and 37 weeks of gestation and whether this rate differs by gestational age at diagnosis of infection. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective, cross-sectional study of all women diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection between 23 and 37 weeks of gestation within a large integrated health system from March 13 to April 24, 2020. Cases with severe fetal structural malformations detected prior to infection were excluded. Women were stratified into two groups based on gestational age at diagnosis: early preterm (230/7 to 336/7 weeks) versus late preterm (34 to 366/7 weeks). We compared the rate of PTB during hospitalization with infection between the two groups. Statistical analysis included use of Wilcoxon rank sum and Fisher exact tests, as well as a multivariable logistic regression. Statistical significance was defined as a p-value <0.05. RESULTS: Of the 65 patients included, 36 (53.7%) were diagnosed in the early preterm period and 29 (46.3%) were diagnosed in the late preterm period. Baseline demographics were similar between groups. The rate of PTB during hospitalization with infection was significantly lower among women diagnosed in the early preterm period compared with late preterm (7/36 [19.4%] vs. 18/29 [62%], p-value = 0.001). Of the 25 patients who delivered during hospitalization with infection, the majority were indicated deliveries (64%, 16/25). There were no deliveries <33 weeks of gestation for worsening coronavirus disease 2019 and severity of disease did not alter the likelihood of delivery during hospitalization with SARS-CoV-2 infection (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.24-1.59). Increased maternal age was associated with a lower likelihood of delivery during hospitalization with SARS-CoV-2 infection (aOR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.58-0.96), while later gestational age at diagnosis of infection was associated with a higher likelihood of delivery during hospitalization (aOR: 2.9; 95% CI: 1.67-8.09). CONCLUSION: The likelihood of PTB during hospitalization with SARS-CoV-2 infection is significantly lower among women diagnosed in the early preterm period compared with late preterm. Most women with SARS-CoV-2 infection in the early preterm period recovered and were discharged home. The majority of PTB were indicated and not due to spontaneous preterm labor. KEY POINTS: · Preterm delivery is less likely among women diagnosed in the early preterm compared with late preterm.. · Most women infected in the early preterm period recovered and were discharged home undelivered.. · The majority of preterm birth were indicated and not due to spontaneous preterm labor..