Term cesarean delivery in the first pregnancy is not associated with an increased risk for preterm delivery in the subsequent pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have reported an increased risk for preterm delivery following a term cesarean delivery. However, these studies did not adjust for high-risk conditions related to the first cesarean delivery and are known to recur. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to determine whether there is an association between term cesarean delivery in the first pregnancy and subsequent spontaneous or indicated preterm delivery. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study of women with the first 2 consecutive singleton deliveries (2007-2014) identified through a linked pregnancy database at a single institution. Women with a first pregnancy that resulted in cesarean delivery at term were compared with women whose first pregnancy resulted in a vaginal delivery at term. Exclusion criteria were known to recur medical or obstetrical complications during the first pregnancy. A propensity score analysis was performed by matching women who underwent a cesarean delivery with those who underwent a vaginal delivery in the first pregnancy. The association between cesarean delivery in the first pregnancy and preterm delivery in the second pregnancy in this matched set was examined using conditional logistic regression. The primary outcome was overall preterm delivery <37 weeks in the second pregnancy. Secondary outcomes included type of preterm delivery (spontaneous vs indicated), late preterm delivery (34-36 6/7 weeks), early preterm delivery (<34 weeks), and small-for-gestational-age birth. RESULTS: Of a total of 6456 linked pregnancies, 2284 deliveries were matched; 1142 were preceded by cesarean delivery and 1142 were preceded by vaginal delivery. The main indications for cesarean delivery in the first pregnancy were dystocia in 703 (61.5%), nonreassuring fetal status in 222 (19.4%), breech presentation in 100 (8.8%), and other in 84 (7.4%). The mean (SD) gestational ages at delivery for the second pregnancy was 38.8 (1.8) and 38.9 (1.7) weeks, respectively, for prior cesarean delivery and vaginal delivery. The risks of preterm delivery in the second pregnancy among women with a previous cesarean and vaginal delivery were 6.0% and 5.2%, respectively (adjusted odds ratio, 1.46, 95% confidence interval, [CI] 0.77-2.76). In an analysis stratified by the type of preterm delivery in the second pregnancy, no associations were seen between cesarean delivery in the first pregnancy and spontaneous preterm delivery (4.6% vs 3.9%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.40, 95% confidence interval, 0.59-3.32) or indicated preterm delivery (1.6% vs 1.4%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.21, 95% confidence interval, 0.60-2.46). Similarly, no significant differences were found in late preterm delivery (4.6% vs 4.1%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.13, 95% confidence interval, 0.55-2.29), early preterm delivery (1.6% vs 1.2%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.25, 95% confidence interval, 0.59-2.67), or neonates with birthweight less than the fifth percentile for gestational age (3.6% vs 2.2%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.26, 95% confidence interval, 0.52-3.06). CONCLUSION: After robust adjustment for confounders through a propensity score analysis related to the indication for the first cesarean delivery at term, cesarean delivery is not associated with an increase in preterm delivery, spontaneous or indicated, in the subsequent pregnancy.

Outcomes of effective transmission of electronic prenatal records from the office to the hospital.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the outcomes associated with improved transmission of prenatal test results between the outpatient and inpatient obstetric setting after implementation of an electronic prenatal record system. METHODS: Admission paper charts of patients admitted to our labor and delivery unit were reviewed before and after implementation of an electronic prenatal record system. The availability of maternal hepatitis B and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) serology on admission, the occurrence of repeat hepatitis B surface antigen and rapid HIV blood testing, and the occurrence of hepatitis B immunoglobulin administration to the newborns of mothers without available hepatitis B serology was recorded. Fisher's exact tests were performed to determine differences in availability of prenatal test results, the occurrence of repeat blood testing, and the occurrence of immunoglobulin administration before and after implementation. RESULTS: A total of 460 admission charts were reviewed, 229 preimplementation and 231 postimplementation. Of the preimplementation charts, 78.2% contained maternal hepatitis B and HIV serology results, whereas all postimplementation charts contained such results (P<.001). Although repeat hepatitis B surface antigen testing was performed in 3.1% of patients preimplementation, no patients required repeat testing postimplementation (P=.007). Similarly, rapid HIV blood testing was performed in 3.5% of patients preimplementation, but no patients required repeat testing postimplementation (P=.003). Increased availability of testing results prevented unnecessary administration of hepatitis B immunoglobulin postimplementation. CONCLUSION: Implementation of an electronic perinatal record system was associated with improved transmission of prenatal test results between the outpatient and inpatient obstetric setting and a decreased rate of unnecessary maternal testing and newborn interventions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Perspective: Academic obstetrics-gynecology departments in the city of Philadelphia: are the wheels coming off?

Maternity care in Philadelphia is in an unprecedented and precarious situation, as all the community hospitals that once provided maternity care services have either closed completely or stopped providing maternity services. Six academic medical centers (AMCs) in the city of Philadelphia now provide care to a population of 1.5 million requiring increasingly complex and expensive maternity care, at the same time as insurance premiums and the malpractice crisis in Pennsylvania peaked. The AMCs are able to continue providing maternity care to this population that includes a large proportion of poor, minority, and un- or underinsured patients thanks to government subsidization of resident education, the services provided by resident physicians, and the influx of government and industry research funds, but the financial outlook of academic obstetrics-gynecology departments in this city is dire. Obstetric academic medicine in Philadelphia has come to more closely resemble a "big wheel" tricycle than Flexner's "three-legged stool." Clinical medicine is the driver (the large front wheel and pedal) pulling along education and research, the two smaller wheels in the back. A maternity care alliance is needed in Philadelphia allowing area AMCs to pool and trade resources, reduce costs, improve quality and innovation, and share risks. Philadelphia may serve as an early warning for other cities and AMCs around the country and has the opportunity to serve as a model for how to overcome these serious challenges.