Comparison of proposed National Institute of Child Health and Human Development panel recommendations with newborn sepsis risk calculator in term neonates exposed to maternal chorioamnionitis.

BACKGROUND: Maternal chorioamnionitis (MC) is one of the major risk factors for early-onset neonatal sepsis. Kaiser sepsis risk calculator (SRC) is a validated risk assessment tool for such newborns. The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) workshop on MC has proposed a risk assessment algorithm. The objective of the study was to compare the reduction in antibiotic use in newborns treated with SRC and NICHD algorithm and determine the antibiotic use correlation between them. METHODOLOGY: A retrospective chart review was performed on newborns born at ≥ 37 weeks to mothers with MC during the years 2018-2020. The same cohort of newborns was evaluated using SRC and NICHD algorithm to determine whether treatment with antibiotics could have been avoided in some patients. The data were analyzed using a t-test, Chi-square test, and ANOVA. RESULTS: During the study period, 101 newborns were born to mothers with chorioamnionitis and received antibiotics. When the newborns were assessed using the SRC, only 16/101 (15.84%) would have received treatment. When NICHD algorithm was applied to the same cohort 71/101 (70.30%) newborns would have received treatment. The two approaches agreed in their assessment for treatment or observation only in 44/101 (43.56%) of the cases. The NICHD treatment group had a higher incidence of chorioamnionitis as seen in placental pathology (94.37% vs. 75.00% for Kaiser, p-0.015). The SRC treatment group however had newborns with significantly lower Apgar score at 1 min (8.21 vs 6.63, p-0.006) and 5-minute (8.69 vs 8.00, p-0.019) and had significantly higher supplemental oxygen requirements at admission (62.50% vs. 21.13%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Both SRC and NICHD algorithms expose fewer newborns to antibiotics; however, they differ in the number of newborns that would require antibiotics. Ventilation assistance and lower Apgar scores were associated with higher probability of antibiotic administration.

Fetal Heart Rate Tracing Category II: A Broad Category in Need of Stratification.

Fetal heart rate (FHR) tracings are classified into 3 categories per the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development guidelines. There exists broad consensus on the recognition and management of categories I and III. However, a category II FHR tracing is considered "indeterminate" and cannot be classified as either reassuring or non-reassuring. Absence of variability and high frequency and increased depth of decelerations are the key determining factors that make a category II tracing non-reassuring and are associated with fetal metabolic acidosis. Periodic category II tracing is present in the majority of normal laboring patients. In the setting of a category II tracing, an initial attempt should be made for in utero resuscitation of the fetus. If the tracing fails to improve over a period of 1 to 2 hours, or the fetal tracing gradually deteriorates, a decision should be made for operative vaginal or cesarean delivery. Category II tracing management algorithms can aid in decision-making in this uncertain clinical scenario. Team training and simulation may improve team performance and have a positive impact on neonatal outcomes.

Performance of racial and ethnic minority-serving hospitals on delivery-related indicators.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to explore how racial/ethnic minority-serving hospitals perform on 15 delivery-related indicators, and examine whether indicators vary by race/ethnicity within the same type of hospitals. STUDY DESIGN: We used 2008 through 2011 linked State Inpatient Database and American Hospital Association data from 7 states, and designated hospitals with >50% of deliveries to non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, and Hispanic women as white-, black-, and Hispanic-serving, respectively. We calculated indicator rates per 1000 deliveries by hospital type and, separately, for non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, and Hispanic women within each hospital type. We fitted multivariate Poisson regression models to examine associations between delivery-related indicators and patient and hospital characteristics by hospital type. RESULTS: White-serving hospitals offer obstetric care to an older and wealthier population than black- or Hispanic-serving hospitals. Rates of the most prevalent indicators examined (complicated vaginal delivery, complicated cesarean delivery, obstetric trauma) were lowest in Hispanic-serving hospitals. Generally, indicator rates were similar in Hispanic- and white-serving hospitals. Black-serving hospitals performed worse than other hospitals on 12 of 15 indicators. Indicator rates varied greatly by race/ethnicity in white- and Hispanic-serving hospitals, with non-Hispanic blacks having 1.19-3.27 and 1.15-2.68 times higher rates than non-Hispanic whites, respectively, for 11 of 15 indicators. Conversely, there were few indicator rate differences by race/ethnicity in black-serving hospitals, suggesting an overall lower performance of these hospitals compared to white- and Hispanic-serving hospitals. CONCLUSION: We found considerable differences in delivery-related indicators by hospital type and patients' race/ethnicity. Obstetric care quality measures are needed to track racial/ethnic disparities at the facility and population levels.

Massive blood transfusion during hospitalization for delivery in New York State, 1998-2007.

OBJECTIVE: To define the frequency, risk factors, and outcomes of massive transfusion in obstetrics. METHODS: The State Inpatient Dataset for New York (1998-2007) was used to identify all delivery hospitalizations for hospitals that reported at least one delivery-related transfusion per year. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to examine the relationship between maternal age, race, and relevant clinical variables and the risk of massive blood transfusion defined as 10 or more units of blood recorded. RESULTS: Massive blood transfusion complicated 6 of every 10,000 deliveries with cases observed even in the smallest facilities. Risk factors with the strongest independent associations with massive blood transfusion included abnormal placentation (1.6/10,000 deliveries, adjusted odds ratio [OR] 18.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 14.7-23.3), placental abruption (1.0/10,000, adjusted OR 14.6, 95% CI 11.2-19.0), severe preeclampsia (0.8/10,000, adjusted OR 10.4, 95% CI 7.7-14.2), and intrauterine fetal demise (0.7/10,000, adjusted OR 5.5, 95% CI 3.9-7.8). The most common etiologies of massive blood transfusion were abnormal placentation (26.6% of cases), uterine atony (21.2%), placental abruption (16.7%), and postpartum hemorrhage associated with coagulopathy (15.0%). A disproportionate number of women who received a massive blood transfusion experienced severe morbidity including renal failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome, sepsis, and in-hospital death. CONCLUSION: Massive blood transfusion was infrequent, regardless of facility size. In the presence of known risk for receipt of massive blood transfusion, women should be informed of this possibility, should deliver in a well-resourced facility if possible, and should receive appropriate blood product preparation and venous access in advance of delivery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: : II.