Neonatal outcomes of maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection in the UK: a prospective cohort study using active surveillance.

BACKGROUND: Newborns may be affected by maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy. We aimed to describe the epidemiology, clinical course and short-term outcomes of babies admitted to a neonatal unit (NNU) following birth to a mother with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection within 7 days of birth. METHODS: This is a UK prospective cohort study; all NHS NNUs, 1 March 2020 to 31 August 2020. Cases were identified via British Paediatric Surveillance Unit with linkage to national obstetric surveillance data. Reporting clinicians completed data forms. Population data were extracted from the National Neonatal Research Database. RESULTS: A total of 111 NNU admissions (1.98 per 1000 of all NNU admissions) involved 2456 days of neonatal care (median 13 [IQR 5, 34] care days per admission). A total of 74 (67%) babies were preterm. In all, 76 (68%) received respiratory support; 30 were mechanically ventilated. Four term babies received therapeutic hypothermia for hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy. Twenty-eight mothers received intensive care, with four dying of COVID-19. Eleven (10%) babies were SARS-CoV-2 positive. A total of 105 (95%) babies were discharged home; none of the three deaths before discharge was attributed to SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSION: Babies born to mothers with SARS-CoV-2 infection around the time of birth accounted for a low proportion of total NNU admissions over the first 6 months of the UK pandemic. Neonatal SARS-CoV-2 was uncommon. STUDY REGISTRATION: ISRCTN60033461; protocol available at http://www.npeu.ox.ac.uk/pru-mnhc/research-themes/theme-4/covid-19 . IMPACT: Neonatal unit admissions of babies born to mothers with SARS-CoV-2 infection comprised only a small proportion of total neonatal admissions in the first 6 months of the pandemic. A high proportion of babies requiring neonatal admission who were born to mothers with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were preterm and had neonatal SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or other conditions associated with long-term sequelae. Adverse neonatal conditions were more common in babies whose SARS-CoV-2-positive mothers required intensive care compared to those whose SARS-CoV-2-positive mothers who did not.

Neonatal outcomes and indirect consequences following maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To identify the association between maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy and individual neonatal morbidities and outcomes, particularly longer-term outcomes such as neurodevelopment. DESIGN: Systematic review of outcomes of neonates born to pregnant women diagnosed with a SARS-CoV-2 infection at any stage during pregnancy, including asymptomatic women. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, WHOLIS and LILACS databases, last searched on 28 July 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Case-control and cohort studies published after 1 January 2020, including preprint articles were included. Study outcomes included neonatal mortality and morbidity, preterm birth, caesarean delivery, small for gestational age, admission to neonatal intensive care unit, level of respiratory support required, diagnosis of culture-positive sepsis, evidence of brain injury, necrotising enterocolitis, visual or hearing impairment, neurodevelopmental outcomes and feeding method. These were selected according to a core outcome set. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted into Microsoft Excel by two researchers, with statistical analysis completed using IBM SPSS (Version 27). Risk of bias was assessed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: The search returned 3234 papers, from which 204 were included with a total of 45 646 infants born to mothers with SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy across 36 countries. We found limited evidence of an increased risk of some neonatal morbidities, including respiratory disease. There was minimal evidence from low-income settings (1 study) and for neonatal outcomes following first trimester infection (17 studies). Neonatal mortality was very rare. Preterm birth, neonatal unit admission and small for gestational age status were more common in infants born following maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy in most larger studies. CONCLUSIONS: There are limited data on neonatal morbidity and mortality following maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection, particularly from low-income countries and following early pregnancy infections. Large, representative studies addressing these outcomes are needed to understand the consequences for babies born to women with SARS-CoV-2. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021249818.

Inconsistent outcome reporting in large neonatal trials: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Inconsistent outcome selection and reporting in clinical trials are important sources of research waste; it is not known how common this problem is in neonatal trials. Our objective was to determine whether large clinical trials involving infants receiving neonatal care report a consistent set of outcomes, how composite outcomes are used and whether parents or former patients were involved in outcome selection. DESIGN: A literature search of CENTRAL, CINAHL, EMBASE and MEDLINE was conducted; randomised trials published between 1 July 2012 and 1 July 2017 and involving at least 100 infants in each arm were included. Outcomes and outcome measures were extracted and categorised by physiological system; reported former patient and parent involvement in outcome selection was extracted. RESULTS: Seventy-six trials involving 43 126 infants were identified; 216 different outcomes with 889 different outcome measures were reported. Outcome reporting covered all physiological systems but was variable between individual trials: only 67/76 (88%) of trials reported survival and 639 outcome measures were only reported in a single trial. Thirty-three composite outcomes were used in 41 trials. No trials reported former patient or parent involvement in outcome selection. CONCLUSIONS: Inconsistent outcome reporting and a lack of parent and former patient involvement in outcome selection in neonatal clinical trials limits the ability of such trials to answer clinically meaningful questions. Developing and implementing a core outcome set for future neonatal trials, with input from all stakeholders, should address these issues.

Parent, patient and clinician perceptions of outcomes during and following neonatal care: a systematic review of qualitative research.

OBJECTIVE: Multiple outcomes can be measured in infants that receive neonatal care. It is unknown whether outcomes of importance to parents and patients differ from those of health professionals. Our objective was to systematically map neonatal care outcomes discussed in qualitative research by patients, parents and healthcare professionals and test whether the frequency with which outcomes are discussed differs between groups. DESIGN: Systematic review of qualitative literature. The following databases were searched: Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO and ASSIA from 1997 to 2017. Publications describing qualitative data relating to neonatal care outcomes, reported by former patients, parents or healthcare professionals, were included. Narrative text was analysed and outcomes grouped thematically by organ system. Permutation testing was applied to assess an association between the outcomes identified and stakeholder group. RESULTS: Sixty-two papers containing the views of over 4100 stakeholders were identified; 146 discrete outcomes were discussed; 58 outcomes related to organ systems and 88 to other more global domains. Permutation testing provides evidence that parents, former patients and health professionals reported outcomes with different frequencies (p=0.037). CONCLUSIONS: Parents, patients and health professionals focus on different outcomes when discussing their experience of neonatal care. A wide range of neonatal care outcomes are reported in qualitative research; many are global outcomes relating to the overall status of the infant. The views of former patients and parents should be taken into consideration when designing research; the development of a core outcomes set for neonatal research will facilitate this.

Developing, implementing and disseminating a core outcome set for neonatal medicine.

BACKGROUND: In high resource settings, 1 in 10 newborn babies require admission to a neonatal unit. Research evaluating neonatal care involves recording and reporting many different outcomes and outcome measures. Such variation limits the usefulness of research as studies cannot be compared or combined. To address these limitations, we aim to develop, disseminate and implement a core outcome set for neonatal medicine. METHODS: A steering group that includes parents and former patients, healthcare professionals and researchers has been formed to guide the development of the core outcome set. We will review neonatal trials systematically to identify previously reported outcomes. Additionally, we will specifically identify outcomes of importance to parents, former patients and healthcare professionals through a systematic review of qualitative studies. Outcomes identified will be entered into an international, multi-perspective eDelphi survey. All key stakeholders will be invited to participate. The Delphi method will encourage individual and group stakeholder consensus to identify a core outcome set. The core outcome set will be mapped to existing, routinely recorded data where these exist. DISCUSSION: Use of a core set will ensure outcomes of importance to key stakeholders, including former patients and parents, are recorded and reported in a standard fashion in future research. Embedding the core outcome set within future clinical studies will extend the usefulness of research to inform practice, enhance patient care and ultimately improve outcomes. Using routinely recorded electronic data will facilitate implementation with minimal addition burden. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database: 842 (www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/842).