Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Prenatal Care Utilization at a Public Hospital.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to compare rates of prenatal care utilization before and after implementation of a telehealth-supplemented prenatal care model due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. STUDY DESIGN: Using electronic medical record data, we identified two cohorts of pregnant persons that initiated prenatal care prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic following the implementation of telehealth (from March 1, 2019 through August 31, 2019, and from March 1, 2020, through August 31, 2020, respectively) at Grady Memorial Hospital. We used Pearson's Chi-square and two-tailed t-tests to compare rates of prenatal care utilization, antenatal screening and immunizations, emergency department and obstetric triage visits, and pregnancy complications for the prepandemic versus pandemic-exposed cohorts. RESULTS: We identified 1,758 pregnant patients; 965 entered prenatal care prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and 793 entered during the pandemic. Patients in the pandemic-exposed cohort were more likely to initiate prenatal care in the first trimester (46.1 vs. 39.0%, p = 0.01), be screened for gestational diabetes (74.4 vs. 67.0%, p <0.001), and receive dating and anatomy ultrasounds (17.8 vs. 13.0%, p = 0.006 and 56.9 vs. 47.3%, p <0.001, respectively) compared with patients in the prepandemic cohort. There was no difference in mean number of prenatal care visits between the two groups (6.9 vs. 7.1, p = 0.18). Approximately 41% of patients in the pandemic-exposed cohort had one or more telehealth visits. The proportion of patients with one or more emergency department visits was higher in the pandemic-exposed cohort than the prepandemic cohort (32.8 vs. 12.3%, p < 0.001). Increases in rates of labor induction were also observed among the pandemic-exposed cohort (47.1 vs. 38.2%, p <0.001). CONCLUSION: Rates of prenatal care utilization were similar before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, pregnant persons receiving prenatal care during the pandemic entered care earlier and had higher utilization of certain antenatal screening services than those receiving prenatal care prior to the pandemic. KEY POINTS: · Patients initiated prenatal care earlier during the COVID-19 pandemic.. · Uptake of telehealth services was low.. · Rates of diabetes screening and ultrasound use increased during the pandemic..

Effectiveness and safety of extending intrauterine device duration: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the literature to determine if extended use of intrauterine devices, including the copper or levonorgestrel intrauterine device, beyond approved durations is effective and safe for preventing pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Global Index Medicus from inception through June 2019. We considered primary studies of women using the T380A copper or currently available levonorgestrel intrauterine devices past their approved duration (extended use). The primary outcome was pregnancy. Safety outcomes included adverse events and side effects that led to discontinuation. We abstracted study data into evidence tables and assessed study quality as related to the risk of bias, precision, and external validity. For each intrauterine device type, we calculated a pooled pregnancy rate during the first 2 years of extended use using the Poisson inverse variance method. RESULTS: Of 4068 studies identified by our search, 4 good-to-poor-quality studies of the 52 mg levonorgestrel intrauterine device (approved for 5 years), with a total of 2098 women starting extended use, and 2 good-to-fair-quality studies of the T380A copper intrauterine device (approved for 10 years), with 245 women starting extended use, met inclusion criteria. For the levonorgestrel intrauterine device, the pooled pregnancy rate was 0.02 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval, 0.00-0.45) in year 6, 0.03 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval, 0.00-0.71) in year 7, and 0.02 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval, 0.00-0.29) in years 6 and 7 combined. During this same time, annual rates of adverse events or discontinuation owing to side effects ranged from 0 to 3.7 per 100 participants. For the copper intrauterine device, the pooled pregnancy rate for years 11 and 12 was 0.0 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval, 0.0-0.8), and annual rates of adverse events and discontinuation owing to side effects during extended use ranged from 0 to 4.6 per 100 participants. CONCLUSION: The available evidence suggests that rates of pregnancy, adverse events, and discontinuation owing to side effects during the first 2 years of extended use of the 52 mg levonorgestrel intrauterine device and the T380A copper intrauterine device are low and comparable to rates during approved duration of use. Data were limited in quantity and quality, and may not be generalizable to all intrauterine device users.