Impacts of heat exposure in utero on long-term health and social outcomes: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Climate change, particularly global warming, is amongst the greatest threats to human health. While short-term effects of heat exposure in pregnancy, such as preterm birth, are well documented, long-term effects have received less attention. This review aims to systematically assess evidence on the long-term impacts on the foetus of heat exposure in utero. METHODS: A search was conducted in August 2019 and updated in April 2023 in MEDLINE(PubMed). We included studies on the relationship of environmental heat exposure during pregnancy and any long-term outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using tools developed by the Joanna-Briggs Institute, and the evidence was appraised using the GRADE approach. Synthesis without Meta-Analysis (SWiM) guidelines were used. RESULTS: Eighteen thousand six hundred twenty one records were screened, with 29 studies included across six outcome groups. Studies were mostly conducted in high-income countries (n = 16/25), in cooler climates. All studies were observational, with 17 cohort, 5 case-control and 8 cross-sectional studies. The timeline of the data is from 1913 to 2019, and individuals ranged in age from neonates to adults, and the elderly. Increasing heat exposure during pregnancy was associated with decreased earnings and lower educational attainment (n = 4/6), as well as worsened cardiovascular (n = 3/6), respiratory (n = 3/3), psychiatric (n = 7/12) and anthropometric (n = 2/2) outcomes, possibly culminating in increased overall mortality (n = 2/3). The effect on female infants was greater than on males in 8 of 9 studies differentiating by sex. The quality of evidence was low in respiratory and longevity outcome groups to very low in all others. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing heat exposure was associated with a multitude of detrimental outcomes across diverse body systems. The biological pathways involved are yet to be elucidated, but could include epigenetic and developmental perturbations, through interactions with the placenta and inflammation. This highlights the need for further research into the long-term effects of heat exposure, biological pathways, and possible adaptation strategies in studies, particularly in neglected regions. Heat exposure in-utero has the potential to compound existing health and social inequalities. Poor study design of the included studies constrains the conclusions of this review, with heterogenous exposure measures and outcomes rendering comparisons across contexts/studies difficult. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD 42019140136.

Blood pressure cutoffs at 11-13 weeks of gestation and risk of preeclampsia.

BACKGROUND: A parallel has been drawn between first-trimester placental vascular maturation and maternal cardiovascular adaptations, including blood pressure. Although 140/90 mm Hg is well-accepted as the threshold for chronic hypertension in the general obstetric population in early pregnancy, a different threshold could apply to stratify the risk of adverse outcomes, such as preeclampsia. This could have implications for interventions, such as the threshold for initiation of antihypertensive therapy and the target blood pressure level. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the relationship between various blood pressure cutoffs at 11-13 weeks of gestation and the development of preeclampsia, overall and according to key maternal characteristics. STUDY DESIGN: This secondary analysis was of data from a prospective nonintervention cohort study of singleton pregnancies delivering at ≥24 weeks, without major anomalies, at 2 United Kingdom maternity hospitals, 2006-2020. Blood pressure at 11-13 weeks of gestation was classified according to American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association categories (mm Hg) as (1) normal blood pressure (systolic <120 and diastolic <80), (2) elevated blood pressure (systolic ≥120 and diastolic <80), stage 1 hypertension (systolic ≥130 or diastolic 80-89), and stage 2 hypertension (systolic ≥140 or diastolic ≥90). For blood pressure category thresholds and the outcome of preeclampsia, the following were calculated overall and across maternal age, body mass index, ethnicity, method of conception, and previous pregnancy history: detection rate, screen-positive rate, and positive and negative likelihood ratios, with 95% confidence intervals. A P value of <.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: There were 137,458 pregnancies screened at 11-13 weeks of gestation. The population was ethnically diverse, with 15.9% of Black ethnicity, 6.7% of South or East Asian ethnicity, and 2.7% of mixed ethnicity, with the remainder of White ethnicity. Compared with normal blood pressure, stage 2 hypertension was associated with both preterm preeclampsia (0.3% to 4.9%) and term preeclampsia (1.0% to 8.3%). A blood pressure threshold of 140/90 mm Hg was good at identifying women at increased risk of preeclampsia overall (positive likelihood ratio, 5.61 [95% confidence interval, 5.14-6.11]) and across maternal characteristics, compared with elevated blood pressure (positive likelihood ratio, 1.70 [95% confidence interval, 1.63-1.77]) and stage 1 hypertension (positive likelihood ratio, 2.68 [95% confidence interval, 2.58-2.77]). There were 2 exceptions: a blood pressure threshold of 130/80 mm Hg was better for the 2.1% of women with body mass index <18.5 kg/m2 (positive likelihood ratio, 5.13 [95% confidence interval, 3.22-8.16]), and a threshold of 135/85 mm Hg better for the 50.4% of parous women without a history of preeclampsia (positive likelihood ratio, 5.24, [95% confidence interval, 4.77-5.77]). There was no blood pressure threshold below which reassurance could be provided against the development of preeclampsia (all-negative likelihood ratios ≥0.20). CONCLUSION: The traditional blood pressure threshold of 140/90 mm Hg performs well to identify women at increased risk of preeclampsia. Women who are underweight or parous with no prior history of preeclampsia may be better identified by lower thresholds; however, a randomized trial would be necessary to determine any benefits of such an approach if antihypertensive therapy were also administered at this threshold. No blood pressure threshold is reassured against the development of preeclampsia, regardless of maternal characteristics.

Courage in Decision Making: A Mixed-Methods Study of COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake in Women of Reproductive Age in the U.K.

COVID-19 vaccination rates are lower in women of reproductive age (WRA), including pregnant/postpartum women, despite their poorer COVID-19-related outcomes. We evaluated the vaccination experiences of 3568 U.K. WRA, including 1983 women (55.6%) experiencing a pandemic pregnancy, recruited through the ZOE COVID Symptom Study app. Two staggered online questionnaires (Oct-Dec 2021: 3453 responders; Aug-Sept 2022: 2129 responders) assessed reproductive status, COVID-19 status, vaccination, and attitudes for/against vaccination. Descriptive analyses included vaccination type(s), timing relative to age-based eligibility and reproductive status, vaccination delay (first vaccination >28 days from eligibility), and rationale, with content analysis of free-text comments. Most responders (3392/3453, 98.2%) were vaccinated by Dec 2021, motivated by altruism, vaccination supportiveness in general, low risk, and COVID-19 concerns. Few declined vaccination (by Sept/2022: 20/2129, 1.0%), citing risks (pregnancy-specific and longer-term), pre-existing immunity, and personal/philosophical reasons. Few women delayed vaccination, although pregnant/postpartum women (vs. other WRA) received vaccination later (median 3 vs. 0 days after eligibility, p < 0.0001). Despite high uptake, concerns included adverse effects, misinformation (including from healthcare providers), ever-changing government advice, and complex decision making. In summary, most women in this large WRA cohort were promptly vaccinated, including pregnant/post-partum women. Altruism and community benefit superseded personal benefit as reasons for vaccination. Nevertheless, responders experienced angst and received vaccine-related misinformation and discouragement. These findings should inform vaccination strategies in WRA.

Women's experiences of maternity care in the United Kingdom during the COVID-19 pandemic: A follow-up systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Maternity care services in the United Kingdom have undergone drastic changes due to pandemic-related restrictions. Prior research has shown maternity care during the pandemic was negatively experienced by women and led to poor physical and mental health outcomes in pregnancy. A synthesis is required of published research on women's experiences of maternity care during the latter half of the COVID-19 pandemic. AIM: To update a previous systematic review of maternity care experiences during the pandemic to June 2021, exploring experiences of maternity care specifically within the United Kingdom and how they may have changed, in order to inform future maternity services. METHODS: A systematic review of qualitative literature was conducted using comprehensive searches of five electronic databases and the Cochrane COVID Study Register, published between 1 June 2021 and 13 October 2022, and further updated to 30 September 2023. Thematic Synthesis was utilised for data synthesis. FINDINGS: Of 21,860 records identified, 27 studies were identified for inclusion. Findings included 14 descriptive themes across the five core concepts: (1)Care-seeking and experience; (2)Virtual care; (3)Self-monitoring; (4)COVID-19 vaccination; (5)Ethical future of maternity care. DISCUSSION: Our findings in the UK are consistent with those globally, and extend those of the previous systematic review, particularly about women's perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest the following are important to women for future maternity care: personalisation and inclusiveness; clear and evidence-based communication to facilitate informed decision-making; and achieving balance between social commitments and time spent settling into motherhood.

Corrigendum: Microbiota dynamics, metabolic and immune interactions in the cervicovaginal environment and their role in spontaneous preterm birth.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1306473.].

Machine learning-enabled maternal risk assessment for women with pre-eclampsia (the PIERS-ML model): a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Affecting 2-4% of pregnancies, pre-eclampsia is a leading cause of maternal death and morbidity worldwide. Using routinely available data, we aimed to develop and validate a novel machine learning-based and clinical setting-responsive time-of-disease model to rule out and rule in adverse maternal outcomes in women presenting with pre-eclampsia. METHODS: We used health system, demographic, and clinical data from the day of first assessment with pre-eclampsia to predict a Delphi-derived composite outcome of maternal mortality or severe morbidity within 2 days. Machine learning methods, multiple imputation, and ten-fold cross-validation were used to fit models on a development dataset (75% of combined published data of 8843 patients from 11 low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries). Validation was undertaken on the unseen 25%, and an additional external validation was performed in 2901 inpatient women admitted with pre-eclampsia to two hospitals in south-east England. Predictive risk accuracy was determined by area-under-the-receiver-operator characteristic (AUROC), and risk categories were data-driven and defined by negative (-LR) and positive (+LR) likelihood ratios. FINDINGS: Of 8843 participants, 590 (6·7%) developed the composite adverse maternal outcome within 2 days, 813 (9·2%) within 7 days, and 1083 (12·2%) at any time. An 18-variable random forest-based prediction model, PIERS-ML, was accurate (AUROC 0·80 [95% CI 0·76-0·84] vs the currently used logistic regression model, fullPIERS: AUROC 0·68 [0·63-0·74]) and categorised women into very low risk (-LR <0·1; eight [0·7%] of 1103 women), low risk (-LR 0·1 to 0·2; 321 [29·1%] women), moderate risk (-LR >0·2 and +LR <5·0; 676 [61·3%] women), high risk (+LR 5·0 to 10·0, 87 [7·9%] women), and very high risk (+LR >10·0; 11 [1·0%] women). Adverse maternal event rates were 0% for very low risk, 2% for low risk, 5% for moderate risk, 26% for high risk, and 91% for very high risk within 48 h. The 2901 women in the external validation dataset were accurately classified as being at very low risk (0% with outcomes), low risk (1%), moderate risk (4%), high risk (33%), or very high risk (67%). INTERPRETATION: The PIERS-ML model improves identification of women with pre-eclampsia who are at lowest and greatest risk of severe adverse maternal outcomes within 2 days of assessment, and can support provision of accurate guidance to women, their families, and their maternity care providers. FUNDING: University of Strathclyde Diversity in Data Linkage Centre for Doctoral Training, the Fetal Medicine Foundation, The Canadian Institutes of Health Research, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Calcium supplementation for the prevention of pre-eclampsia: Challenging the evidence from meta-analyses.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the validity of the conclusion from Cochrane reviews and meta-analyses that treatment with calcium supplementation during pregnancy reduces the risk for pre-eclampsia by 55%, which has been influential in international guidelines and future research. DESIGN: Sensitivity analysis of data from Cochrane reviews of trials evaluating high-dose calcium supplementation (of at least 1 g/day) for reduction of pre-eclampsia risk. SETTING: Systematic review and meta-analysis. POPULATION: The Cochrane reviews and meta-analyses included 13 trials enrolling a total of 15 730 women. Random-effects meta-analysis of these studies resulted in a mean risk ratio (RR, calcium/placebo) of 0.45 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31-0.65; p < 0.0001). METHODS: We carried out a sensitivity analysis of evidence from the relevant Cochrane review, to examine the impact of study size. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: pre-eclampsia. RESULTS: In the three largest studies, accounting for 13 815 (88%) of total recruitment, mean RR was 0.92 (95% CI 0.80-1.06) and there was no evidence of heterogeneity between studies (I2 = 0). With inclusion of the smaller studies, mean RR decreased to 0.45 and I2 increased to 70%. CONCLUSIONS: In assessment of the effect of calcium supplementation on pre-eclampsia risk, the naive focus on the mean of the random-effects meta-analysis in the presence of substantial heterogeneity is highly misleading.

Blood Pressure and Heart Rate Variability and the Impact on Pregnancy Outcomes: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Long-term (visit-to-visit) blood pressure variability (BPV) and heart rate variability (HRV) outside pregnancy are associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes. Given the limitations of relying solely on blood pressure level to identify pregnancies at risk, long-term (visit-to-visit) BPV or HRV may provide additional diagnostic/prognostic counsel. To address this, we conducted a systematic review to examine the association between long-term BPV and HRV in pregnancy and adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: Databases were searched from inception to May 2023 for studies including pregnant women, with sufficient blood pressure or heart rate measurements to calculate any chosen measure of BPV or HRV. Studies were excluded that reported short-term, not long-term, variability. Adjusted odds ratios were extracted. Eight studies (138 949 pregnancies) reporting BPV met our inclusion criteria; no study reported HRV and its association with pregnancy outcomes. BPV appeared to be higher in women with hypertension and preeclampsia specifically, compared with unselected pregnancy cohorts. Greater BPV was associated with significantly more adverse pregnancy outcomes, particularly maternal (gestational hypertension [odds ratio range, 1.40-2.15], severe hypertension [1.40-2.20]), and fetal growth (small-for-gestational-age infants [1.12-1.32] or low birth weight [1.18-1.39]). These associations were independent of mean blood pressure level. In women with hypertension, there were stronger associations with maternal outcomes but no consistent pattern for perinatal outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Future work should aim to confirm whether BPV could be useful for risk stratification prospectively in pregnancy, and should determine the optimal management path for those women identified at increased risk of adverse outcomes.

Pregnancy-An Ideal Period to Identify Women at Risk for Chronic Hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of mortality in women. Pregnancy is an ideal period to implement cardiovascular prevention strategies as women seek medical help. We aimed to develop a predictive model to identify women at increased risk for chronic hypertension (CH) based on information collected in the index pregnancy. METHODS: Cohort of 26 511 women seen in 2 consecutive pregnancies. Included were women without CH, with information on maternal characteristics and blood pressure at 11 to 13 weeks' gestation, and the development of preeclampsia or gestational hypertension (GH) in the index pregnancy. Logistic regression models were fitted for the prediction of the development of future CH by the 20th week of the subsequent pregnancy. The performance of screening and risk calibration of the model were assessed. RESULTS: In this study 1560 (5.9%) women developed preeclampsia or GH (index pregnancy), and 215 (0.8%) developed future CH, with a median of 3.0 years later. Predictors of development of future CH were maternal age, weight, and blood pressure; Black and South Asian ethnicity; family history of preeclampsia; parity; and development of preeclampsia or GH. Preeclampsia or GH detected 52.1% (45.2%-58.9%) of future CH. At a screen-positive rate of 10%, a model including maternal characteristics, early pregnancy blood pressure, and development of preeclampsia or GH detected 73.5% (67.1-79.3) of future CH. CONCLUSIONS: Early pregnancy maternal characteristics, blood pressure, and development of preeclampsia or GH identify three-fourths of women at risk for future CH. Our results offer an important preventative strategy for identifying women at increased risk of future CH, which is applicable worldwide.

Impact of COVID-19 on gestational diabetes pregnancy outcomes in the UK: A multicentre retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of implementing emergency care pathway(s) for screening, diagnosing and managing women with gestational diabetes (GDM) during COVID-19. DESIGN: Retrospective multicentre cohort. SETTING: Nine National Health Service (NHS) Hospital Trusts/Health boards in England and Scotland. POPULATION: 4915 women with GDM pre-pandemic (1 April 2018 to 31 March 2020), and 3467 women with GDM during the pandemic (1 May 2020 to 31 March 2021). METHODS: We examined clinical outcomes for women with GDM prior to and during the pandemic following changes in screening methods, diagnostic testing, glucose thresholds and introduction of virtual care for monitoring of antenatal glycaemia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Intervention at birth, perinatal mortality, large-for-gestational-age infants and neonatal unit admission. RESULTS: The new diagnostic criteria more often identified GDM women who were multiparous, had higher body mass index (BMI) and greater deprivation, and less frequently had previous GDM (all p < 0.05). During COVID, these women had no differences in the key outcome measures. Of the women, 3% were identified with pre-existing diabetes at antenatal booking. Where OGTT continued during COVID, but virtual care was introduced, outcomes were also similar pre- and during the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Using HbA1c and fasting glucose identified a higher risk GDM population during the pandemic but this had minimal impact on pregnancy outcomes. The high prevalence of undiagnosed pre-existing diabetes suggests that women with GDM risk factors should be offered HbA1c screening in early pregnancy.

Placental growth factor testing at 19-23 weeks of gestation as a guide to subsequent care in pregnancy: A prospective observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether serum placental growth factor (PlGF) at 19-23 weeks of gestation can improve the identification of risk for adverse outcomes. DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study. SETTING: Two English maternity units. POPULATION: Unselected singleton pregnancies attending routine ultrasound at 19-23 weeks of gestation. METHODS: Outcomes ascertained by health record review. Diagnostic test properties evaluated clinical risk factors for pre-eclampsia (according to National Institute of Care Excellence) or fetal growth restriction (according to Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists), low PlGF at 19-23 weeks of gestation (<5th percentile) or both. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pre-eclampsia, gestational hypertension, stillbirth, birthweight below third percentile or neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission for ≥48 h. RESULTS: In 30 013 pregnancies, risk factors were present in 9941 (33.1%), low PlGF was present in 1501 (5.0%) and both ('two-stage' screening) were present in 547 (1.8%) pregnancies. Risk factors detected 41.7%-54.7% of adverse outcomes, and could not meaningfully revise the risk (all positive likelihood ratios, +LR, <5.0; all negative likelihood ratios, -LR, ≥0.2). Low PlGF detected 8.5%-17.4% of adverse outcomes, but meaningfully increased risks (other than NICU admission) associated with delivery <37 weeks of gestation (+LR = 5.03-15.55); all -LRs were ≥0.2. 'Two-stage' screening detected 4.2%-8.9% of adverse outcomes, with meaningful +LRs (6.28-18.61) at <37 weeks of gestation, except for NICU admission of ≥48 h, which had an +LR of 7.56 at <34 weeks of gestation; all -LRs were ≥0.2. No screening strategy meaningfully increased or decreased the detection of adverse outcome risk at term. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical risk factor screening has a high screen-positive rate and a poor detection of adverse outcomes. False positives cannot be reduced by PlGF testing at 19-23 weeks of gestation; therefore, this cannot be recommended as a useful strategy on its own.

Risk factors for pre-eclampsia in clinical practice guidelines: Comparison with the evidence.

OBJECTIVE: To compare pre-eclampsia risk factors identified by clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) with risk factors from hierarchical evidence review, to guide pre-eclampsia prevention. DESIGN: Our search strategy provided hierarchical evidence of relationships between risk factors and pre-eclampsia using Medline (Ovid), searched from January 2010 to January 2021. SETTING: Published studies and CPGs. POPULATION: Pregnant women. METHODS: We evaluated the strength of association and quality of evidence (GRADE). CPGs (n = 15) were taken from a previous systematic review. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Pre-eclampsia. RESULTS: Of 78 pre-eclampsia risk factors, 13 (16.5%) arise only during pregnancy. Strength of association was usually 'probable' (n = 40, 51.3%) and the quality of evidence was low (n = 35, 44.9%). The 'major' and 'moderate' risk factors proposed by 8/15 CPGs were not well aligned with the evidence; of the ten 'major' risk factors (alone warranting aspirin prophylaxis), associations with pre-eclampsia were definite (n = 4), probable (n = 5) or possible (n = 1), based on moderate (n = 4), low (n = 5) or very low (n = 1) quality evidence. Obesity ('moderate' risk factor) was definitely associated with pre-eclampsia (high-quality evidence). The other ten 'moderate' risk factors had probable (n = 8), possible (n = 1) or no (n = 1) association with pre-eclampsia, based on evidence of moderate (n = 1), low (n = 5) or very low (n = 4) quality. Three risk factors not identified by the CPGs had probable associations (high quality): being overweight; 'prehypertension' at booking; and blood pressure of 130-139/80-89 mmHg in early pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-eclampsia risk factors in CPGs are poorly aligned with evidence, particularly for the strongest risk factor of obesity. There is a lack of distinction between risk factors identifiable in early pregnancy and those arising later. A refresh of the strategies advocated by CPGs is needed.

Pregnancy-related mortality up to 1 year postpartum in sub-Saharan Africa: an analysis of verbal autopsy data from six countries.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the causes of death for women who died during pregnancy and within the first 42 days postpartum with those of women who died between >42 days and within 1 year postpartum. DESIGN: Open population cohort (Health and Demographic Surveillance Systems). SETTING: Ten Health and Demographic Surveillance Systems (HDSS) in The Gambia, Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania, Ethiopia and South Africa. POPULATION: 2114 deaths which occurred within 1 year of the end of pregnancy where a verbal autopsy interview was conducted from 2000 to 2019. METHODS: InterVA5 and InSilicoVA verbal autopsy algorithms were used to attribute the most likely underlying cause of death, which were grouped according to adapted International Classification of Diseases-Maternal Mortality categories. Multinomial regression was used to compare differences in causes of deaths within 42 days versus 43-365 days postpartum adjusting for HDSS and time period (2000-2009 and 2010-2019). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cause of death and the verbal autopsy Circumstances of Mortality Categories (COMCATs). RESULTS: Of 2114 deaths, 1212 deaths occurred within 42 days postpartum and 902 between 43 and 365 days postpartum. Compared with deaths within 42 days, deaths from HIV and TB, other infectious diseases, and non-communicable diseases constituted a significantly larger proportion of late pregnancy-related deaths beyond 42 days postpartum, and health system failures were important in the circumstances of those deaths. The contribution of HIV and TB to deaths beyond 42 days postpartum was greatest in Southern Africa. The causes of pregnancy-related mortality within and beyond 42 days postpartum did not change significantly between 2000-2009 and 2010-2019. CONCLUSIONS: Cause of death data from the extended postpartum period are critical to inform prevention. The dominance of HIV and TB, other infectious and non-communicable diseases to (late) pregnancy-related mortality highlights the need for better integration of non-obstetric care with ante-, intra- and postpartum care in high-burden settings.

Blood pressure measurement and adverse pregnancy outcomes: A cohort study testing blood pressure variability and alternatives to 140/90 mmHg.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association with adverse pregnancy outcomes of: (1) American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association blood pressure (BP) thresholds, and (2) visit-to-visit BP variability (BPV), adjusted for BP level. DESIGN: An observational study. SETTING: Analysis of data from the population-based UK Southampton Women's Survey (SWS). POPULATION OR SAMPLE: 3003 SWS participants. METHODS: Generalised estimating equations were used to estimate crude and adjusted relative risks (RRs) of adverse pregnancy outcomes by BP thresholds, and by BPV (as standard deviation [SD], average real variability [ARV] and variability independent of the mean [VIM]). Likelihood ratios (LRs) were calculated to evaluate diagnostic test properties, for BP at or above a threshold, compared with those below. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Gestational hypertension, severe hypertension, pre-eclampsia, preterm birth (PTB), small-for-gestational-age (SGA) infants, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission. RESULTS: A median of 11 BP measurements were included per participant. For BP at ≥20 weeks' gestation, higher BP was associated with more adverse pregnancy outcomes; however, only BP <140/90 mmHg was a good rule-out test (negative LR <0.20) for pre-eclampsia and BP ≥140/90 mmHg a good rule-in test (positive LR >8.00) for the condition. BP ≥160/110 mmHg could rule-in PTB, SGA infants and NICU admission (positive LR >5.0). Higher BPV (by SD, ARV, or VIM) was associated with gestational hypertension, severe hypertension, pre-eclampsia, PTB, SGA and NICU admission (adjusted RRs 1.05-1.39). CONCLUSIONS: While our findings do not support lowering the BP threshold for pregnancy hypertension, they suggest BPV could be useful to identify elevated risk of adverse outcomes.

Transitioning from the "Three Delays" to a focus on continuity of care: a qualitative analysis of maternal deaths in rural Pakistan and Mozambique.

BACKGROUND: The Three Delays Framework was instrumental in the reduction of maternal mortality leading up to, and during the Millennium Development Goals. However, this paper suggests the original framework might be reconsidered, now that most mothers give birth in facilities, the quality and continuity of the clinical care is of growing importance. METHODS: The paper explores the factors that contributed to maternal deaths in rural Pakistan and Mozambique, using 76 verbal autopsy narratives from the Community Level Interventions for Pre-eclampsia (CLIP) Trial. RESULTS: Qualitative analysis of these maternal death narratives in both countries reveals an interplay of various influences, such as, underlying risks and comorbidities, temporary improvements after seeking care, gaps in quality care in emergencies, convoluted referral systems, and arrival at the final facility in critical condition. Evaluation of these narratives helps to reframe the pathways of maternal mortality beyond a single journey of care-seeking, to update the categories of seeking, reaching and receiving care. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to supplement the pioneering "Three Delays Framework" to include focusing on continuity of care and the "Four Critical Connection Points": (1) between the stages of pregnancy, (2) between families and health care workers, (3) between health care facilities and (4) between multiple care-seeking journeys. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01911494, Date Registered 30/07/2013.

SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in pregnant women during the first three COVID-19 waves in The Gambia.

OBJECTIVES: SARS-CoV-2 transmission in sub-Saharan Africa has probably been underestimated. Population-based seroprevalence studies are needed to determine the extent of transmission in the continent. METHODS: Blood samples from a cohort of Gambian pregnant women were tested for SARS-CoV-2 total receptor binding domain (RBD) immunoglobulin (Ig) M/IgG before (Pre-pandemic: October-December 2019) and during the pandemic (Pre-wave 1: February-June 2020; Post-wave 1: October-December 2020, Post-wave 2: May-June 2021; and Post-wave 3: October-December 2021). Samples reactive for SARS-CoV-2 total RBD IgM/IgG were tested in specific S1- and nucleocapsid (NCP) IgG assays. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 total RBD IgM/IgG seroprevalence was 0.9% 95% confidence interval (0.2, 4.9) in Pre-pandemic; 4.1% (1.4, 11.4) in Pre-wave 1; 31.1% (25.2, 37.7) in Post-wave 1; 62.5% (55.8, 68.8) in Post-wave 2 and 90.0% (85.1, 93.5) in Post-wave 3. S-protein IgG and NCP-protein IgG seroprevalence also increased at each Post-wave period. Although S-protein IgG and NCP-protein IgG seroprevalence was similar at Post-wave 1, S-protein IgG seroprevalence was higher at Post-wave 2 and Post-wave 3, (prevalence difference 13.5 [0.1, 26.8] and prevalence ratio 1.5 [1.0, 2.3] in Post-wave 2; and 22.9 [9.2, 36.6] and 1.4 [1.1, 1.8] in Post-wave 3 respectively, P <0.001). CONCLUSION: SARS-CoV-2 transmission in The Gambia during the first 3 COVID-19 waves was high, differing significantly from official numbers of COVID-19 cases reported. Our findings are important for policy makers in managing the near-endemic COVID-19.