COVID Vaccine Information Sources Utilized by Female Healthcare Workers.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials of the messenger RNA COVID-19 vaccines excluded individuals with active reproductive needs (attempting to conceive, currently pregnant, and/or lactating). Women comprise three-quarters of healthcare workers in the United States-an occupational field among the first to receive the vaccine. Professional medical and government organizations have encouraged shared decision-making and access to vaccination among those with active reproductive needs. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to characterize the information sources used by pregnancy-capable healthcare workers for information about the COVID-19 vaccines and to compare the self-reported "most important" source by the respondents' active reproductive needs, if any. STUDY DESIGN: This was a web-based national survey of female, US-based healthcare workers in January 2021. Recruitment was done using social media and subsequent sharing via word of mouth. We classified the respondents into 6 groups on the basis of self-reported reproductive needs as follows: (1) preventing pregnancy, (2) attempting pregnancy, (3) currently pregnant, (4) lactating, (5) attempting pregnancy and lactating, and (6) currently pregnant and lactating. We provided respondents with a list of information sources (friends, family, obstetrician-gynecologists, pediatrician, news, social media, government organizations, their employer, and "other") and asked respondents which source(s) they used when looking for information about the vaccine and their most important source. We used descriptive statistics to characterize the information sources and compared the endorsement of government organizations and obstetrician-gynecologists, which were the most important information source between reproductive groups, using the chi-square test. The effect size was calculated using Cramér V. RESULTS: Our survey had 11,405 unique respondents: 5846 (51.3%) were preventing pregnancy, 955 (8.4%) were attempting pregnancy, 2196 (19.3%) were currently pregnant, 2250 (19.7%) were lactating, 67 (0.6%) were attempting pregnancy and lactating, and 91 (0.8%) were currently pregnant and lactating. The most endorsed information sources were government organizations (88.7%), employers (48.5%), obstetrician-gynecologists (44.9%), and social media (39.6%). Considering the most important information source, the distribution of respondents endorsing government organizations was different between reproductive groups (P<.001); it was most common among respondents preventing pregnancy (62.6%) and least common among those currently pregnant (31.5%). We observed an inverse pattern among the respondents endorsing an obstetrician-gynecologist as the most important source; the source was most common among currently pregnant respondents (51.4%) and least common among those preventing pregnancy (5.8%), P<.001. The differences in the endorsement of social media as an information source between groups were significant but had a small effect size. CONCLUSION: Healthcare workers use government and professional medical organizations for information. Respondents attempting pregnancy and those pregnant and/or lactating are more likely to use social media and an obstetrician-gynecologist as information sources for vaccine decision-making. These data can inform public health messaging and counseling for clinicians.

Characterizing initial COVID-19 vaccine attitudes among pregnancy-capable healthcare workers.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers were prioritized for COVID-19 vaccination roll-out because of the high occupational risk. Vaccine trials excluded individuals who were trying to conceive and those who are pregnant and lactating, necessitating vaccine decision-making in the absence of data specific to this population. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the initial attitudes about COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy-capable healthcare workers by reproductive status and occupational exposure. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a structured survey distributed via social media of US-based healthcare workers involved in patient care since March 2020 who were pregnancy-capable (biologic female sex without history of sterilization or hysterectomy) from January 8, 2021 to January 31, 2021. Participants were asked about their desire to receive the COVID-19 vaccine and their perceived safety of the COVID-19 vaccine using 5-point Likert items with 1 corresponding to "I strongly don't want the vaccine" or "very unsafe for me" and 5 corresponding to "I strongly want the vaccine" or "very safe for me." We categorized participants into the following 2 groups: (1) reproductive intent (preventing pregnancy vs attempting pregnancy, currently pregnant, or currently lactating), and (2) perceived COVID-19 occupational risk (high vs low). We used descriptive statistics to characterize the respondents and their attitudes about the vaccine. Comparisons between reproductive and COVID-19 risk groups were conducted using Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: Our survey included 11,405 pregnancy-capable healthcare workers: 51.3% were preventing pregnancy (n=5846) and 48.7% (n=5559) were attempting pregnancy, currently pregnant, and/or lactating. Most respondents (n=8394, 73.6%) had received a vaccine dose at the time of survey completion. Most participants strongly desired vaccination (75.3%) and very few were strongly averse (1.5%). Although the distribution of responses was significantly different between respondents preventing pregnancy and those attempting conception or were pregnant and/or lactating and also between respondents with a high occupational risk and those with a lower occupational risk of COVID-19, the effect sizes were small and the distribution was the same for each group (median, 5; interquartile range, 4-5). CONCLUSION: Most of the healthcare workers desired vaccination. Negative feelings toward vaccination were uncommon but were significantly higher among those attempting pregnancy and those who are pregnant and lactating and also among those with a lower perceived occupational risk of contracting COVID-19, although the effect size was small. Understanding healthcare workers' attitudes toward vaccination may help guide interventions to improve vaccine education and uptake in the general population.

Pregnancy as a risk factor for severe coronavirus disease 2019 using standardized clinical criteria.

BACKGROUND: As of November 18, 2020, more than 11 million people have been infected with coronavirus disease 2019 and almost 250,000 people have died from the disease in the United States, less than 1 year since its discovery. Although literature is beginning to emerge on pregnancy as a risk factor for severe coronavirus disease 2019, these studies are heterogeneous and use primary outcomes such as intensive care unit admission or hospitalization as surrogate markers that may subject analyses to misclassification bias in pregnant patients. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 among pregnant women with symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 compared with nonpregnant women using nonadmission-based, standardized clinical criteria for severe disease. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study of women aged 13 to 45 years and diagnosed as having symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 between May 28, 2020, and July 22, 2020. The primary outcome was severe coronavirus disease 2019 as defined by 2 sets of nonadmission-based, clinical criteria: the World Health Organization Ordinal Scale for Clinical Improvement and the Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia Emergency Response Epidemiology Team. Adjusted risk ratios were estimated using multivariable logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Of 262 women aged 13 to 45 years with symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019, 22 (8.4%) were pregnant and 240 (91.6%) were nonpregnant. After adjusting for covariates potentially associated with the primary outcome, symptomatic pregnant women were at a significantly increased risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 compared with nonpregnant women using both the World Health Organization Ordinal Scale for Clinical Improvement (adjusted relative risk, 3.59; 95% confidence interval, 1.49-7.01) and Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia Emergency Response Epidemiology Team (adjusted relative risk, 5.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.36-17.31) criteria. CONCLUSION: Pregnancy significantly increases the risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 as defined by nonadmission-based, clinical criteria.

Pregnancy and breastfeeding in the context of Ebola: a systematic review.

The outbreaks of Ebola virus between 2014 and 2020 have drawn attention to knowledge gaps related to Ebola virus disease in pregnant women. The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate available data on pregnant and lactating women with acute Ebola virus disease or following recovery. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL, POPLINE, Global Health, and WHO Global Index Medicus, in addition to grey literature, for relevant articles. Studies of all types and published between database inception and Aug 19, 2019, were eligible (PROSPERO 129335). We identified 1060 records, of which 52 studies met our inclusion criteria. Overall, mortality in 274 pregnant women with Ebola virus disease was 72% (197 women died); mortality for pregnant women with Ebola virus disease were not higher than those in the general population of patients with Ebola virus disease. Nearly all women with Ebola virus disease had adverse pregnancy outcomes. Among survivors, Ebola virus RNA was detected by RT-PCR in amniotic fluid up to 32 days after maternal clearance of Ebola virus from the blood and in breastmilk 26 days after symptom onset. A risk of transmission of Ebola virus from pregnancy-related fluids and breastmilk probably exists, and precautions should be taken.

Rate and causes of severe maternal morbidity at readmission: California births in 2008-2012.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the rate, maternal characteristics, timing, and indicators of severe maternal morbidity (SMM) that occurs at postpartum readmission. STUDY DESIGN: Women with a birth in California during 2008-2012 were included in the analysis. Readmissions up to 42 days after delivery were investigated. SMM was defined as presence of any of the 21 indicators defined by ICD-9 codes. RESULTS: Among 2,413,943 women with a birth, SMM at readmission occurred in 4229 women. Of all SMM, 12.1% occurred at readmission. Over half (53.5%) of the readmissions with SMM occurred within the first week after delivery hospitalization. The most common indicators of SMM were blood transfusion, sepsis, and pulmonary edema/acute heart failure. CONCLUSION: Twelve percent of SMM was identified at readmission with the majority occurring within 1 week after discharge from delivery hospitalization. Because early readmission may reflect lack of discharge readiness, there may be opportunities to improve care.

Risk Factors for Maternal Readmission with Sepsis.

OBJECTIVE: Our primary objective was to identify risk factors for maternal readmission with sepsis. Our secondary objectives were to (1) assess diagnoses and infecting organisms at readmission and (2) compare early (<6 weeks) and late (6 weeks to 9 months postpartum) maternal readmission with sepsis. STUDY DESIGN: We identified our cohort using linked hospital discharge data and birth certificates for California deliveries from 2008 to 2011. Consistent with the 2016 sepsis classification, we defined sepsis as septicemia plus acute organ dysfunction. We compared women with early or late readmission with sepsis to women without readmission with sepsis. RESULTS: Among 1,880,264 women, 494 (0.03%) were readmitted with sepsis, 61% after 6 weeks. Risk factors for readmission with sepsis included preterm birth, hemorrhage, obesity, government-provided insurance, and primary cesarean. For both early and late sepsis readmissions, the most common diagnoses were urinary tract infection and pyelonephritis, and the most frequently identified infecting organism was gram-negative bacteria. Women with early compared with late readmission with sepsis shared similar obstetric characteristics. CONCLUSION: Maternal risk factors for both early and late readmission with sepsis included demographic characteristics, cesarean, hemorrhage, and preterm birth. Risks for sepsis after delivery persist beyond the traditional postpartum period of 6 weeks.

Maternal sepsis: new concepts, new practices.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Sepsis is a leading cause of severe maternal morbidity and maternal death. As pregnancy-related sepsis can be difficult to recognize, clinicians should maintain a low threshold for early evaluation and treatment. RECENT FINDINGS: Definitions and treatment guidelines for maternal sepsis were recently revised in 2016 and 2017 by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign and WHO. Multiple clinical decision tools have been created to aid clinicians in early recognition and risk prediction for sepsis in obstetric populations, but currently, an optimal screening tool does not exist. Early recognition and urgent treatment is paramount for patient survival. Antibiotics should be started within 1 h and fluid resuscitation should be initiated if sepsis-induced hypoperfusion is present. Care should be escalated to appropriate settings and source control provided. SUMMARY: Obstetricians have a heightened understanding of the physiologic changes in pregnancy and play a vital role in coordinating patient care and improving outcomes. The recent 2016 and 2017 revisions of definitions for maternal sepsis and treatment should be incorporated into clinical practice.

Application of machine-learning to predict early spontaneous preterm birth among nulliparous non-Hispanic black and white women.

PURPOSE: Spontaneous preterm birth is a leading cause of perinatal mortality in the United States, occurring disproportionately among non-Hispanic black women compared to other race-ethnicities. Clinicians lack tools to identify first-time mothers at risk for spontaneous preterm birth. This study assessed prediction of early (<32 weeks) spontaneous preterm birth among non-Hispanic black and white women by applying state-of-the-art machine-learning to multilevel data from a large birth cohort. METHODS: Data from birth certificate and hospital discharge records for 336,214 singleton births to nulliparous women in California from 2007 to 2011 were used in cross-validated regressions, with multiple imputation for missing covariate data. Residential census tract information was overlaid for 281,733 births. Prediction was assessed with areas under the receiver operator characteristic curves (AUCs). RESULTS: Cross-validated AUCs were low (0.62 [min = 0.60, max = 0.63] for non-Hispanic blacks and 0.63 [min = 0.61, max = 0.65] for non-Hispanic whites). Combining racial-ethnic groups improved prediction (cross-validated AUC = 0.67 [min = 0.65, max = 0.68]), approaching what others have achieved using biomarkers. Census tract-level information did not improve prediction. CONCLUSIONS: The resolution of administrative data was inadequate to precisely predict individual risk for early spontaneous preterm birth despite the use of advanced statistical methods.

Maternal Congenital Heart Disease in Pregnancy.

Congenital heart disease comprises most maternal cardiac diseases in pregnancy and is an important cause of maternal, fetal, and neonatal morbidity and mortality worldwide. Pregnancy is often considered a high-risk state for individuals with structural heart disease as a consequence of a limited ability to adapt to the major hemodynamic changes associated with pregnancy. Preconception counseling and evaluation are of utmost importance, as pregnancy is contraindicated in certain cardiac conditions. Pregnancy can be safely accomplished in most individuals with careful risk assessment before conception and multidisciplinary care throughout pregnancy and the postpartum period.

Marijuana Use in Pregnancy: Concerns in an Evolving Era.

Marijuana is the most commonly used illicit drug in pregnancy, and the prevalence of use during pregnancy is increasing in the United States. Although much of the existing research investigating marijuana use in pregnancy is limited by study design and confounding factors, a growing accumulation of data suggests adverse outcomes. Studies have identified associations with decreased birth weight, increased spontaneous preterm birth, and impaired neurodevelopment among children and adults with in utero exposure. Moderate concentrations of marijuana have also been identified in breast milk. Due to these findings, multiple professional societies have issued clear statements against marijuana use during pregnancy and lactation.

Does Induction with Misoprostol Impact the Small for Gestational Age Neonate?

OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes in small for gestational age neonates induced with misoprostol to other cervical ripening agents. We hypothesized that misoprostol use will demonstrate no significant difference in outcomes compared with alternative agents. STUDY DESIGN: Small for gestational age neonates (<10th percentile for gestational age) from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) sponsored Consortium on Safe Labor database were analyzed. Neonates induced with misoprostol ± oxytocin (n = 451) were compared with neonates induced with prostaglandin E2 ± oxytocin and/or mechanical dilation ± oxytocin (n = 663). Primary outcomes included intrapartum fetal distress, cesarean section for fetal distress, cesarean section for any reason, neonatal intensive care unit admission, low 5-minute Apgar, and composite neonatal morbidity. Multiple logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aORs). Data were analyzed using SAS. RESULTS: Small for gestational age neonates induced with misoprostol ± oxytocin compared with alternative agents had decreased low 5-minute Apgar scores (aOR 0.27 [0.10-0.71]). No significant differences were demonstrated among very small for gestational age neonates (<5th percentile for gestational age). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that misoprostol does not increase risk of adverse outcomes in small for gestational age neonates; however, prospective studies are warranted to further assess optimal cervical ripening agents in this population.

Combination Levothyroxine + Liothyronine Treatment in Pregnancy.

Hypothyroidism is one of the most common endocrine disorders in young women and affects 3% to 4% of all pregnancies. Inadequately treated maternal hypothyroidism is associated with numerous adverse fetal and maternal outcomes. Because of growing popularity of levothyroxine (L-T4) + liothyronine (L-T3) combination therapy for hypothyroidism in nonpregnant individuals, pregnant women are taking these medications with increasing frequency. This article reviews the theoretical dangers of combination L-T4 + L-T3 treatment during pregnancy by outlining physiological regulation of maternal and fetal thyroid homeostasis, proposed adverse fetal outcomes to combination therapy, and current recommendations on thyroid replacement in pregnancy from professional societies.