Characteristics associated with antenatally unidentified small-for-gestational-age fetuses: prospective cohort study nested within DESiGN randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the clinical characteristics and patterns of ultrasound use amongst pregnancies with an antenatally unidentified small-for-gestational-age (SGA) fetus, compared with those in which SGA is identified, to understand how to design interventions that improve antenatal SGA identification. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of singleton, non-anomalous SGA (birth weight < 10th centile) neonates born after 24 + 0 gestational weeks at 13 UK sites, recruited for the baseline period and control arm of the DESiGN trial. Pregnancy with antenatally unidentified SGA was defined if there was no scan or if the final scan showed estimated fetal weight (EFW) at the 10th centile or above. Identified SGA was defined if EFW was below the 10th centile at the last scan. Maternal and fetal sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were studied for associations with unidentified SGA using unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models. Ultrasound parameters (gestational age at first growth scan, number and frequency of ultrasound scans) were described, stratified by presence of indication for serial ultrasound. Associations of unidentified SGA with absolute centile and percentage weight difference between the last scan and birth were also studied on unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression, according to time between the last scan and birth. RESULTS: Of the 15 784 SGA babies included, SGA was not identified antenatally in 78.7% of cases. Of pregnancies with unidentified SGA, 47.1% had no recorded growth scan. Amongst 9410 pregnancies with complete data on key maternal comorbidities and antenatal complications, the risk of unidentified SGA was lower for women with any indication for serial scans (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.56 (95% CI, 0.49-0.64)), for Asian compared with white women (aOR, 0.80 (95% CI, 0.69-0.93)) and for those with non-cephalic presentation at birth (aOR, 0.58 (95% CI, 0.46-0.73)). The risk of unidentified SGA was highest among women with a body mass index (BMI) of 25.0-29.9 kg/m2 (aOR, 1.15 (95% CI, 1.01-1.32)) and lowest in those with underweight BMI (aOR, 0.61 (95% CI, 0.48-0.76)) compared to women with BMI of 18.5-24.9 kg/m2 . Compared to women with identified SGA, those with unidentified SGA had fetuses of higher SGA birth-weight centile (adjusted odds for unidentified SGA increased by 1.21 (95% CI, 1.18-1.23) per one-centile increase between the 0th and 10th centiles). Duration between the last scan and birth increased with advancing gestation in pregnancies with unidentified SGA. SGA babies born within a week of the last growth scan had a mean difference between EFW and birth-weight centiles of 19.5 (SD, 13.8) centiles for the unidentified-SGA group and 0.2 (SD, 3.3) centiles for the identified-SGA group (adjusted mean difference between groups, 19.0 (95% CI, 17.8-20.1) centiles). CONCLUSIONS: Unidentified SGA was more common amongst women without an indication for serial ultrasound, and in those with cephalic presentation at birth, BMI of 25.0-29.9 kg/m2 and less severe SGA. Ultrasound EFW was overestimated in women with unidentified SGA. This demonstrates the importance of improving the accuracy of SGA screening strategies in low-risk populations and continuing performance of ultrasound scans for term pregnancies. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Improving antenatal detection of small-for-gestational-age fetus: economic evaluation of Growth Assessment Protocol.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the Growth Assessment Protocol (GAP), as implemented in the DESiGN trial, is cost-effective in terms of antenatal detection of small-for-gestational-age (SGA) neonate, when compared with standard care. METHODS: This was an incremental cost-effectiveness analysis undertaken from the perspective of a UK National Health Service hospital provider. Thirteen maternity units from England, UK, were recruited to the DESiGN (DEtection of Small for GestatioNal age fetus) trial, a cluster randomized controlled trial. Singleton, non-anomalous pregnancies which delivered after 24 + 0 gestational weeks between November 2015 and February 2019 were analyzed. Probabilistic decision modeling using clinical trial data was undertaken. The main outcomes of the study were the expected incremental cost, the additional number of SGA neonates identified antenatally and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) (cost per additional SGA neonate identified) of implementing GAP. Secondary analysis focused on the ICER per infant quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. RESULTS: The expected incremental cost (including hospital care and implementation costs) of GAP over standard care was £34 559 per 1000 births, with a 68% probability that implementation of GAP would be associated with increased costs to sustain program delivery. GAP identified an additional 1.77 SGA neonates per 1000 births (55% probability of it being more clinically effective). The ICER for GAP was £19 525 per additional SGA neonate identified, with a 44% probability that GAP would both increase cost and identify more SGA neonates compared with standard care. The probability of GAP being the dominant clinical strategy was low (11%). The expected incremental cost per infant QALY gained ranged from £68 242 to £545 940, depending on assumptions regarding the QALY value of detection of SGA. CONCLUSION: The economic case for replacing standard care with GAP is weak based on the analysis reported in our study. However, this conclusion should be viewed taking into account that cost-effectiveness analyses are always limited by the assumptions made. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Maternity services in the UK during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: a national survey of modifications to standard care.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the modifications to maternity services across the UK, in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, in the context of the pandemic guidance issued by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG), Royal College of Midwives (RCM) and NHS England. DESIGN: National survey. SETTING: UK maternity services during the COVID-19 pandemic. POPULATION OR SAMPLE: Healthcare professionals working within maternity services. METHODS: A national electronic survey was developed to investigate local modifications to general and specialist maternity care during the COVID-19 pandemic, in the context of the contemporaneous national pandemic guidance. After a pilot phase, the survey was distributed through professional networks by the RCOG and co-authors. The survey results were presented descriptively in tabular and graphic formats, with proportions compared using chi-square tests. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Service modifications made during the pandemic. RESULTS: A total of 81 respondent sites, 42% of the 194 obstetric units in the UK, were included. They reported substantial and heterogeneous maternity service modifications. Seventy percent of units reported a reduction in antenatal appointments and 56% reported a reduction in postnatal appointments; 89% reported using remote consultation methods. A change to screening pathways for gestational diabetes mellitus was reported by 70%, and 59% had temporarily removed the offer of births at home or in a midwife-led unit. A reduction in emergency antenatal presentations was experienced by 86% of units. CONCLUSIONS: This national survey documents the extensive impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on maternity services in the UK. More research is needed to understand the impact on maternity outcomes and experience. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: A national survey showed that UK maternity services were modified extensively and heterogeneously in response to COVID-19.

Enhanced recovery programmes: do these have a role in gynaecology?

Enhanced recovery (ER) has become increasingly ubiquitous in most surgical specialities and its use is gathering pace. It has been proven to be a safe and effective means of managing patients perioperatively, while also improving patient outcomes, and its use in gynaecology has recently been supported by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG). ER is gaining popularity, despite being a diversion from the traditional surgical approach, demanding an orchestration of primary, secondary, social and auxillary care teams to work effectively. ER has been heralded as improving clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction, while simultaneously allowing increased patient turnover. This has potentially massive impacts on service provision within the NHS and is likely to become a proof of concept that the NHS can adapt. ER can be championed as a flexible and contemporary healthcare model, which can be improved as patients' needs and NHS resources change.