The importance of professional responsibility and fetal viability in the management of abortion.

In June 2022, the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization Supreme Court decision ended the constitutional right to the professional practice of abortion throughout the United States. The removal of the constitutional right to abortion has significantly altered the practice of obstetricians and gynecologists across the US. It potentially increases risks to pregnant patients, leads to profound changes in how physicians can provide care, especially in states with strict bans or gestational limits to abortion, and has introduced personal challenges, including moral distress and injury as well as legal risks for patients and clinicians alike. The professional responsibility model is based on the ethical concept of medicine as a profession and has been influential in shaping medical ethics in the field of obstetrics and gynecology. It provides the framework for the importance of ethical and professional conduct in obstetrics and gynecology. Viability marks a stage where the fetus is a patient with a claim to access to medical care. By allowing unrestricted abortions past this stage without adequate justifications, such as those concerning the life and health of the pregnant individual, or in instances of serious fetal anomalies, the states may not be upholding the equitable ethical consideration owed to the fetus as a patient. Using the professional responsibility model, we emphasize the need for nuanced, evidence-based policies that allow abortion management prior to viability without restrictions and allow abortion after viability to protect the pregnant patient's life and health, as well as permitting abortion for serious fetal anomalies.

Analysis of maternal mortality in Berlin, Germany - discrepancy between reported maternal mortality and comprehensive death certificate exploration.

OBJECTIVES: The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) estimates an average maternal mortality rate (MMR) of around 3.4 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births for 2019-2021, based on relevant diagnoses on death certificates. However, Germany does not currently have a registry for recording the number of maternal deaths. The aim of this study is to identify the actual number of maternal deaths in Berlin between 2019 and 2022, as well as sources of underreporting and causes of death. METHODS: Potential maternal mortality cases were identified through a search at the Berlin Central Archive for Death Certificates, inquiring women aged 15-50 years with indications of present or recent pregnancy on the death certificate. To cross match the database, an additional search at the Charité University Hospital Berlin was carried out, checking each individual file for pregnancy-association. RESULTS: The data search resulted in 2,316 women, 18 of which presented an association to pregnancy. Of these, 12 could be classified as maternal mortality cases (MMR 7.8/100,000). The additional search in a university setting revealed two further maternal mortality cases without prior indication of pregnancy on the death certificate. This results in a total MMR of 9.1/100,000 live births, which is over double the official estimate by the OECD. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our findings in Berlin, it can be estimated that there is significant underreporting regarding maternal death cases in Germany. A more comprehensive recording system is needed to more accurately portray maternal mortality.

Anger: an underappreciated destructive force in healthcare.

Anger is an emotional state that occurs when unexpected things happen to or around oneself and is "an emotional state that varies in intensity from mild irritation to intense fury and rage." It is defined as "a strong feeling of displeasure and usually of antagonism," an emotion characterized by tension and hostility arising from frustration, real or imagined injury by another, or perceived injustice. It can manifest itself in behaviors designed to remove the object of the anger (e.g., determined action) or behaviors designed merely to express the emotion. For the Roman philosopher Seneca anger is not an uncontrollable, impulsive, or instinctive reaction. It is, rather, the cognitive assent that such initial reactions to the offending action or words are in fact unjustified. It is, rather, the cognitive assent that such initial reactions to the offending action or words are in fact unjustified. It seems that the year 2022 was a year when many Americans were plainly angry. "Why is everyone so angry?" the New York Times asked in the article "The Year We Lost It." We believe that Seneca is correct in that anger is unacceptable. Anger is a negative emotion that must be controlled, and Seneca provides us with the tools to avoid and destroy anger. Health care professionals will be more effective, content, and happier if they learn more about Seneca's writings about anger and implement his wisdom on anger from over 2000 years ago.

Hidden in plain sight in the delivery room - the Apgar score is biased.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare the maximum 5-min Apgar score of 10 among different U.S. races and Hispanic ethnicity. METHODS: Retrospective population-based cohort study from the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), and Division of Vital Statistics natality online database. We included only deliveries where the race and Hispanic ethnicity of the father and mother were listed as either Black, White, Chinese, or Asian Indian and as Hispanic or Latino origin or other. Proportions of 5-Minute Apgar scores of 10 were compared among different races and Hispanic ethnicity for six groups each for mother and father: Non-Hispanic or Latino White, Hispanic or Latino White, Non-Hispanic or Latino Black, Hispanic or Latino Black, Chinese, and Asian Indian. RESULTS: The study population consists of 9,710,066 mothers and 8,138,475 fathers from the US natality birth data 2016-2019. Black newborns had a less than 50% chance of having a 5-min Apgar score of 10 when compared to white newborns (OR 0.47 for Black mother and Black father; p<0.001). White babies (non-Hispanic and Hispanic) had the highest proportion of Apgar scores of 10 across all races and ethnicities. CONCLUSIONS: The Apgar score introduces a bias by systematically lowering the score in people of color. Embedding skin color scoring into basic data and decisions of health care propagates race-based medicine. By removing the skin color portion of the Apgar score and with it's racial and ethnic bias, we will provide more accuracy and equity when evaluating newborn babies worldwide.

Why maternal mortality in the world remains tragedy in low-income countries and shame for high-income ones: will sustainable development goals (SDG) help?

Maternal death is defined as the death of a woman while pregnant or within 42 days of termination of pregnancy, irrespective of the duration and the site of the pregnancy, from any cause related to or aggravated by the pregnancy or its management. Maternal mortality (MM) and morbidity are a public health issue, with scarce knowledge on their levels and causes in low-income (LIC) countries. The data on MM and morbidity should rely on population-based studies which are non-existent. Therefore, maternal mortality ratio (MMR) estimates are based mostly on the mathematical models. MMR declined from 430 per 100,000 live births (LB) in 1990 to 211 in 2017. Absolute numbers of maternal deaths were 585,000 in 1990, 514,500 in 1995 and less than 300,000 nowadays. Regardless of reduction, MM remains neglected tragedy especially in LIC. Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) declared reduction MMR by three quarters between 2000 and 2015, which failed. Target of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) was to decrease MMR to 70 per 100,000 LB. Based on the data from the country report on SDGs in 10 countries with the highest absolute number of maternal deaths it can be concluded that the progress has not been made in reaching the targeted MMR. To reduce MMR, inequalities in access to and quality of reproductive, maternal, and newborn health care services should be addressed, together with strengthening health systems to respond to the needs and priorities of women and girls, ensuring accountability to improve quality of care and equity.

Prevention of risks of overweight and obesity in pregnant women.

Overweight and obesity in pregnancy and prepregnancy are perinatal risks. Studies showed prevention of these risks with counseling about the risks and treatment strategies like lifestyle interventions as exercise on a daily basis, nutritional health and diet.

Covid and pregnancy in the United States - an update as of August 2022.

COVID-19 is caused by the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). The first cases of COVID-19 were identified in December 2019, and the first United States (US) case was identified on January 20th, 2020. Since then, COVID-19 has spread throughout the world and was declared a pandemic by the WHO on March 11, 2020. As of July 2022, about 90 million persons have been infected with COVID-19 in the US, and there have been over 1 million deaths There have been 224,587 pregnant patients infected with COVID-19, and 34,527 were hospitalized. Pregnancy increases the risk of severe disease associated with COVID-19 and vaccinated patients are significantly less likely to develop severe disease. Adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes are more common among women infected with SARS-CoV-2 during pregnancy, especially among those with severe disease, and vaccination also protects the newborn infant. The intrauterine transmission of SARS-CoV-2 appears to be rare. COVID-19 vaccinations and booster shots in pregnancy are safe. In addition, the available data suggest that vaccination during pregnancy is associated with the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies to the fetus. The vaccination of lactating women is associated with high levels of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in the breast milk. It is important that with future pandemics the concept of vaccine recommendations in pregnancy should be made early on to prevent maternal, fetal, and neonatal morbidity and mortality. Physicians and other healthcare professionals should strongly recommend COVID-19 vaccination to patients who are pregnant, planning to become pregnant, and to those who are breastfeeding.

Obesity in pregnant women: a 20-year analysis of the German experience.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: To investigate the longitudinal development of maternal body weight and analyze the influence of obesity on obstetrics during more than two decades in Germany. SUBJECTS/METHODS: Data collected from the Federal state of Schleswig-Holstein (German Perinatal Survey) were analyzed with regard to the dynamics of maternal anthropometric variables (body weight, BMI) between 1995-7 and 2004-17. In total 335,511 mothers substantiated the presented study-collective. The statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 26.0. Armonk, NY. RESULTS: Maternal BMI advanced significantly over the study period. Among a rise in mean periconceptional body weight (67.6-72.0 kg), the segment of obese women increased disproportionately (in average 9.4-19.2%). Despite the observed trend to late giving birth (mean maternal age 1995: 29.3 vs. 30.7 years in 2017), it was not advanced maternal age but parity that influenced the continuous increase in maternal weight (mean maternal body weight 1995-7: primi- bi-, multiparae 67.4, 68.3 and 69.0 kg vs. 2004-17: primi- bi-, multiparae 70.0, 71.5 and 73.2 kg respectively). CONCLUSION: Obesity is a major problem on health issues in obstetrics. Advancing maternal BMI, increasing mother's age and derived prenatal risks considerably complicate pregnancy and delivery. It has to be emphasized that its consequences do not end with delivery or childbed, but represent a livelong burden to the mother and their offspring. Hence, multimodal strategies to reduce/control periconceptional body weight are mandatory.

Quality criteria for randomized controlled studies: obstetrical journal guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Most retractions of obstetrics and gynecology manuscripts are because of scientific misconduct. It would be preferable to prevent randomized controlled trials with scientific misconduct from ever appearing in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, rather than to have to retract them later. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the policies of obstetrics and gynecology and top medical journals in their author guidelines and electronic submission systems regarding prospective randomized controlled trial registration, ethics committee approval, research protocols, Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trial guidelines, and data sharing and to detect the most common quality criteria requested for randomized controlled trials in these journals. STUDY DESIGN: Author guidelines were identified via online Google searches from the websites of selected peer-reviewed medical journals. Journals in obstetrics and gynecology were selected from the list of journals with impact factors based on the Journal Citation Report released by Clarivate Analytics on June 29, 2020, focusing on those publishing original clinical research in obstetrics, in particular randomized controlled trials. In addition, 4 of the top impact factor peer-reviewed general medical journals publishing randomized controlled trials were included. The requirements for selected quality criteria for randomized controlled trials analyzed in the author guidelines for each journal were details of 5 general issues: prospective randomized controlled trial registration (4 subcategories), ethics committee approval (4 subcategories), research protocol (3 subcategories), Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines (3 subcategories), and data sharing (3 subcategories). To evaluate the requirements within the electronic submission system, a mock submission of a randomized controlled trial was also done for each journal, and the same criteria were assessed on the online software for submission. The primary outcome was the overall percentage for each of the quality criteria that were listed as required within the author guidelines or required in the submission system among all journals. Planned subgroup analyses were top general medicine vs obstetrics and gynecology journals and top 4 obstetrics and gynecology vs other obstetrics and gynecology journals. RESULTS: Most studied peer-reviewed journals listed in their author guidelines 7 specific criteria for submission of randomized controlled trials: prospective registration and registration number, statement of ethical approval with name of approving committee and statement of informed consent, statement of adherence to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines, and data sharing statement. For most journals, the submission software did not require these or any other criteria for submission. There were minimal differences in criteria listed for top medical journals vs other obstetrics and gynecology journals and among top vs other obstetrics and gynecology journals. CONCLUSION: Prospective registration and registration number, statement of ethical approval with name of approving committee and statement of informed consent, statement of adherence to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines, and data sharing statement are the randomized controlled trial quality criteria requested by leading medical and obstetrics and gynecology journals. These obstetrics and gynecology journals agree to make, as much as possible, these criteria uniform and mandatory in author guidelines and also through improved submission software.

How fever is defined in COVID-19 publications: a disturbing lack of precision.

OBJECTIVES: Fever is the single most frequently reported manifestation of COVID-19 and is a critical element of screening persons for COVID-19. The meaning of "fever" varies depending on the cutoff temperature used, the type of thermometer, the time of the day, the site of measurements, and the person's gender and race. The absence of a universally accepted definition for fever has been especially problematic during the current COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This investigation determined the extent to which fever is defined in COVID-19 publications, with special attention to those associated with pregnancy. RESULTS: Of 53 publications identified in which "fever" is reported as a manifestation of COVID-19 illness, none described the method used to measure patient's temperatures. Only 10 (19%) publications specified the minimum temperature used to define a fever with values that varied from a 37.3 °C (99.1 °F) to 38.1 °C (100.6 °F). CONCLUSIONS: There is a disturbing lack of precision in defining fever in COVID-19 publications. Given the many factors influencing temperature measurements in humans, there can never be a single, universally accepted temperature cut-off defining a fever. This clinical reality should not prevent precision in reporting fever. To achieve the precision and improve scientific and clinical communication, when fever is reported in clinical investigations, at a minimum the cut-off temperature used in determining the presence of fever, the anatomical site at which temperatures are taken, and the instrument used to measure temperatures should each be described. In the absence of such information, what is meant by the term "fever" is uncertain.

Professionally responsible counseling about birth location during the COVID-19 pandemic.

If the worries about the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic are not already enough, some pregnant women have been questioning whether the hospital is a safe or safe enough place to deliver their babies and therefore whether they should deliver out-of-hospital during the pandemic. In the United States, planned out-of-hospital births are associated with significantly increased risks of neonatal morbidity and death. In addition, there are obstetric emergencies during out-of-hospital births that can lead to adverse outcomes, partly because of the delay in transporting the woman to the hospital. In other countries with well-integrated obstetric services and well-trained midwives, the differences in outcomes of planned hospital birth and planned home birth are smaller. Women are empowered to make informed decisions when the obstetrician makes ethically justified recommendations, which is known as directive counseling. Recommendations are ethically justified when the outcomes of one form of management is clinically superior to another. The outcomes of morbidity and mortality and of infection control and prevention of planned hospital birth are clinically superior to those of out-of-hospital birth. The obstetrician therefore should recommend planned hospital birth and recommend against planned out-of-hospital birth during the COVID-19 pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic has increased stress levels for all patients and even more so for pregnant patients and their families. The response in this difficult time should be to mitigate this stress and empower women to make informed decisions by routinely providing counseling that is evidence-based and directive.

Characteristics, management and outcomes of very preterm triplets in 19 European regions.

OBJECTIVE: To describe obstetrical care and in-hospital outcomes in very preterm triplet pregnancies in a European multiregional cohort. METHODS: Data from a prospective population-based study of very preterm births between 22 + 0 and 31 + 6 weeks of gestation in 19 regions from 11 European countries participating in the EPICE project in 2011/2012 were used to describe triplet pregnancies and compare them with twins and singletons. RESULTS: Triplets constituted 1.1% of very preterm pregnancies (97/8851) and 3.3% of very preterm live births (258/7900); these percentages varied from 0% to 2.6% and 0% to 6% respectively across the regions. In-hospital mortality after live birth was 12.4% and did not differ significantly from singletons or twins or by birth order. However, 28.9% of mothers with a triplet pregnancy experienced at least one neonatal death. Ninety percent of live-born triplets were delivered by cesarean. Vaginal delivery was associated with an Apgar score of less than 7, but not with in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of very preterm triplets varies across European regions. Most triplets were born by cesarean and those born vaginally had lower Apgar scores. Overall, in-hospital mortality after live birth was similar to singletons and twins.

Mode of delivery and mortality and morbidity for very preterm singleton infants in a breech position: A European cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Caesarean section (CS) may reduce mortality and morbidity for very preterm breech infants, but evidence is inconclusive. We evaluated neonatal outcomes for singleton breech infants by mode of delivery in a European cohort. STUDY DESIGN: Data come from the EPICE population-based cohort of very preterm births in 19 regions in 11 European countries (7770 live births). The study population was singleton spontaneous-onset breech births at 24-31 weeks gestational age (GA) without antenatal medical complications requiring caesarean delivery (N = 572). Mixed-effects regression models adjusting for maternal and pregnancy covariates and propensity score matching was used to examine the effect of (1) CS and (2) a unit policy of systematic CS for breech presentation by GA. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital mortality, intraventricular haemorrhage grades III & IV or cystic periventricular leukomalacia. Secondary outcomes were each component separately, five minute Apgar score below seven and mortality within six hours of delivery. RESULTS: 64.4% of infants were delivered by CS with a range across regions from 41% to 100%; these infants had higher GA and were more likely to be small for gestational age, receive antenatal steroids, and have mothers who were hospitalised for more than one day before delivery compared to those delivered vaginally. CS was associated with lower risks of all outcomes in mixed-effects adjusted models (odds ratio (OR) for the composite outcome: 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.30-0.81), but not in propensity score matched models (OR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.41; 1.29). A systematic CS policy was associated with lower mortality and morbidity in unadjusted, but not adjusted models (OR for composite outcome: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.44; 1.28). 35% of births 24-25 weeks were delivered by CS and protective effects were consistently stronger, but not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Point estimates indicated protective effects of caesarean delivery for very preterm breech infants in conventional statistical models. However, analyses using propensity scores and based on unit policies did not confirm statistically significant associations. Prospective large-scale studies are needed to establish best practice and could be implemented in European regions where vaginal delivery remains an option.