Postpartum Hemorrhage in Patients with Type 1 von Willebrand Disease: A Systematic Review.

Type 1 von Willebrand disease (VWD) is the most common subtype of VWD, comprising 75% of VWD patients. We provide a systematic review of type 1 VWD in pregnancy. Our objective was to evaluate the rate of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) in patients with known type 1 VWD. The primary outcome was rate of PPH. Primary PPH was defined as a cumulative blood loss ≥1,000 mL, or blood loss accompanied by signs and symptoms of hypovolemia within 24 hours postpartum or requiring blood products. Secondary PPH was defined as significant bleeding 24 hours to 12 weeks postpartum. Relevant articles published in English pertaining to VWD and pregnancy were identified without any time or study limitations. Seven articles (n = 144 pregnancies) met inclusion criteria. The rate of primary PPH was 4/144 (2.8%). The secondary PPH rate was reported in four studies, and occurred in 7/48 pregnancies (14.6%), ranging from 2 to 19 days postpartum. In conclusion, according to this systematic review, the frequency of primary PPH in pregnancies with known type 1 VWD is 2.8%. This is similar to the overall PPH rates of 3% reported in the literature. Although the sample size was small, secondary PPH occurred in almost 15% of pregnancies, while in the overall obstetrical population this occurs in approximately 1% of cases. Patients with known type 1 VWD may not be at increased risk of primary PPH, though they appear to bear increased risk of secondary PPH.

Hands-on versus hands-off techniques for the prevention of perineal trauma during vaginal delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Perineal trauma at the time of vaginal delivery is common, and when the anal sphincter is included, these injuries can be associated with additional morbidity including incontinence, pelvic pain, and sexual dysfunction. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to evaluate whether a hands-on technique during vaginal delivery results in less incidence of perineal trauma than a hands-off technique. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched from their inception until June 2018. No restrictions for language or geographic location were applied. The reference lists of identified articles were examined to identify studies not captured by electronic searches. Randomized controlled trials comparing a hands-on technique of perineal support during vaginal delivery (i.e. intervention group) with a hands-off technique (i.e. control group) were included in the meta-analysis. Hands-on was defined as involving one hand on the fetal head, applying pressure to control expulsion, with the other hand applying pressure on the maternal perineum. The primary outcome was severe perineal trauma, defined as either third- or fourth-degree lacerations. The meta-analysis was performed using the random effects model of DerSimonian and Laird, to produce summary treatment effects in terms of relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Five trials, including 7287 women, were analyzed. All studies included singleton gestations with cephalic presentation at term undergoing spontaneous vaginal delivery. Women randomized to the hands-on technique had similar incidence of severe perineal trauma (1.5 versus 1.3%; RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.56-7.15). There was no significant between-group difference in the incidence of intact perineum, first-, second- and fourth-degree laceration. Hands-on technique was associated with increased risk of third-degree lacerations (2.6 versus 0.7%; RR 3.41, 95% CI 1.39-8.37) and of episiotomy (13.6 versus 9.8%, RR 1.59, 95% CI 1.14-2.22) compared to the hands-off technique. CONCLUSIONS: Hands-on technique during spontaneous vaginal delivery of singleton gestations results in similar incidence of several perineal traumas compared to a hands-off technique. The incidence of third-degree lacerations and of episiotomy increases with the hands-on technique. Key Message A hands-on technique during vaginal delivery results in similar incidence of severe lacerations compared to hands-off.

Clinical course of severe and critical coronavirus disease 2019 in hospitalized pregnancies: a United States cohort study.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has had an impact on healthcare systems around the world with 3 million people contracting the disease and 208,000 cases resulting in death as of this writing. Information regarding coronavirus infection in pregnancy is still limited. Objective: This study aimed to describe the clinical course of severe and critical coronavirus disease 2019 in hospitalized pregnant women with positive laboratory testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Study Design: This is a cohort study of pregnant women with severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019 hospitalized at 12 US institutions between March 5, 2020, and April 20, 2020. Severe disease was defined according to published criteria as patient-reported dyspnea, respiratory rate >30 per minute, blood oxygen saturation ≤93% on room air, ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to the fraction of inspired oxygen <300 mm Hg, or lung infiltrates >50% within 24-48 hours on chest imaging. Critical disease was defined as respiratory failure, septic shock, or multiple organ dysfunction or failure. Women were excluded from the study if they had presumed coronavirus disease 2019, but laboratory testing was negative. The primary outcome was median duration from hospital admission to discharge. Secondary outcomes included need for supplemental oxygen, intubation, cardiomyopathy, cardiac arrest, death, and timing of delivery. The clinical courses are described by the median disease day on which these outcomes occurred after the onset of symptoms. Treatment and neonatal outcomes are also reported. Results: Of 64 hospitalized pregnant women with coronavirus disease 2019, 44 (69%) had severe disease, and 20 (31%) had critical disease. The following preexisting comorbidities were observed: 25% had a pulmonary condition, 17% had cardiac disease, and the mean body mass index was 34 kg/m2. Gestational age was at a mean of 29±6 weeks at symptom onset and a mean of 30±6 weeks at hospital admission, with a median disease day 7 since first symptoms. Most women (81%) were treated with hydroxychloroquine; 7% of women with severe disease and 65% of women with critical disease received remdesivir. All women with critical disease received either prophylactic or therapeutic anticoagulation during their admission. The median duration of hospital stay was 6 days (6 days [severe group] and 10.5 days [critical group]; P=.01). Intubation was usually performed around day 9 on patients who required it, and peak respiratory support for women with severe disease was performed on day 8. In women with critical disease, prone positioning was required in 20% of cases, the rate of acute respiratory distress syndrome was 70%, and reintubation was necessary in 20%. There was 1 case of maternal cardiac arrest, but there were no cases of cardiomyopathy or maternal death. Thirty-two of 64 (50%) women with coronavirus disease 2019 in this cohort delivered during their hospitalization (34% [severe group] and 85% [critical group]). Furthermore, 15 of 17 (88%) pregnant women with critical coronavirus disease 2019 delivered preterm during their disease course, with 16 of 17 (94%) pregnant women giving birth through cesarean delivery; overall, 15 of 20 (75%) women with critical disease delivered preterm. There were no stillbirths or neonatal deaths or cases of vertical transmission. Conclusion: In pregnant women with severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019, admission into the hospital typically occurred about 7 days after symptom onset, and the duration of hospitalization was 6 days (6 [severe group] vs 12 [critical group]). Women with critical disease had a high rate of acute respiratory distress syndrome, and there was 1 case of cardiac arrest, but there were no cases of cardiomyopathy or maternal mortality. Hospitalization of pregnant women with severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019 resulted in delivery during the clinical course of the disease in 50% of this cohort, usually in the third trimester. There were no perinatal deaths in this cohort.

Cigarette Smoking and Musculoskeletal Pain Severity Among Male and Female Afghanistan/Iraq Era Veterans.

OBJECTIVE: Cigarette smoking and musculoskeletal pain are prevalent among Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system users. These conditions frequently co-occur; however, there is limited empirical information specific to Afghanistan/Iraq era veterans. The present study sought to examine gender differences in the association between cigarette smoking and moderate to severe musculoskeletal pain in US veterans with Afghanistan/Iraq era service. METHODS: A random sample of 5,000 veterans with service after November 11, 2001, participated in a survey assessing health care needs and barriers to care. One thousand ninety veterans completed the survey assessing post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, depressive symptoms, and current pain severity. Multivariate logistic regression was used to examine the association between gender, cigarette smoking status, and current moderate to severe musculoskeletal pain. RESULTS: Findings indicated a significant gender by smoking interaction on moderate/severe musculoskeletal pain, adjusting for age, self-reported race/ethnicity and weight status, combat exposure, probable PTSD, depressive symptoms, service-connected injury during deployment, and VA health care service utilization. Deconstruction of the interaction indicated that female veteran smokers, relative to female nonsmokers, had increased odds of endorsing moderate to severe musculoskeletal pain (odds ratio [OR] = 2.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.16-6.41), whereas this difference was nonsignificant for male veterans (OR = 1.03, 95% CI = 0.69-1.56). CONCLUSIONS: Survey data from Operation Enduring Freedom/Operation Iraqi Freedom veterans suggest an association between current smoking, gender, and moderate to severe musculoskeletal pain. The stronger relationship between smoking and pain in women supports the need for interventional and longitudinal research that can inform gender-based risk factors for pain in veteran cigarette smokers.

Intravenous fluid rate for reduction of cesarean delivery rate in nulliparous women: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine have emphasized the need to promote vaginal delivery and have offered recommendations to safely prevent primary cesarean delivery. However, there has been limited discussion regarding management of intravenous fluids and other aspects of labor management that may influence mode of delivery. Therefore the aim of our study was to determine whether an intravenous fluid rate of 250 vs. 125 mL/h is associated with a difference in cesarean delivery rate. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Searches were performed in MEDLINE, OVID, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials. We included all randomized controlled trials comparing intravenous fluid rates of 250 vs. 125 mL/h in nulliparous women in spontaneous labor at term with singleton pregnancies at ≥36 weeks. Studies were included regardless of the type of intravenous fluids used and regardless of whether oral intake was restricted during labor. Studies including multiparous women or women whose labor was induced were excluded. The primary outcome was the incidence of cesarean delivery. We planned to assess a subgroup analysis according to type of fluids used and according to restriction of oral fluid intake. RESULTS: Seven trials including 1215 nulliparous women in spontaneous labor at term were analyzed; 593 (48.8%) in the 250 mL/h group, and 622 (51.2%) in the 125 mL/h group. Five studies used lactated Ringer's solution, one used normal saline in dextrose water, and in one study it was unclear which intravenous fluid was used. Women who received intravenous fluids at 250 mL/h had a significantly lower incidence of cesarean delivery for any indication (12.5 vs. 18.1%; RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53-0.92; seven studies, 1215 participants; I2 = 0%) and for dystocia (4.9 vs. 7.7%; RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.38-0.97; five studies, 1093 participants; I2 = 18%), a significantly shorter mean duration of labor of about one hour (mean difference -64.38 min, 95% CI -121.88 to -6.88; six studies, 1155 participants; I2 = 83%) and a significantly shorter mean length of second stage of labor (mean difference -2.80 min, 95% CI -4.49 to -1.10; 899 participants; I2 = 22%) compared with those who received intravenous fluid at 125 mL/h. No differences were found in the other secondary outcomes. There were no maternal or perinatal deaths and only one woman, in the 125 mL/h group, developed pulmonary edema. The findings persisted regardless of the type of intravenous fluid used. No significant reduction in the incidence of cesarean delivery was demonstrated in women with unrestricted oral intake; however, this was limited to only two studies evaluating 254 women. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide evidence that the duration of labor in low-risk nulliparous women may be shortened by a policy of intravenous fluids at a rate of 250 mL/h rather than 125 mL/h. A rate of 250 mL/h seems to be associated with a reduction in the incidence of cesarean delivery compared to 125 mL/h. The number needed to treat to prevent one cesarean delivery is 18 women. Our data support increased hydration among nulliparous women in labor when oral intake is restricted. Further study is needed regarding risks and benefits of increased hydration among women with unrestricted oral intake, those undergoing induction of labor, and those with medical comorbidities.

Preventing progression to chronicity in first onset, subacute low back pain: an exploratory study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of a behavioral medicine intervention, relative to an attention control, in preventing chronic pain and disability in patients with first-onset, subacute low back pain (LBP) with limitations in work-role function. DESIGN: A 2-group, experimental design with randomization to behavioral medicine or attention control groups. SETTING: Orthopedic clinic at a Naval Medical Center. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-seven participants with first-onset LBP of 6 to 10 weeks of duration and impairment in work function, of whom 50 completed all 4 therapy sessions and follow-up 6 months after pain onset. INTERVENTION: Four 1-hour individual treatment sessions of either behavioral medicine, focused on back function and pain education, self-management training, graded activity increases, fear reduction, and pain belief change; or attention control condition, focused on empathy, support, and reassurance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was proportion of participants classified as recovered, according to pre-established clinical cutoffs on standardized measures, signifying absence of chronic pain and disability at 6 months after pain onset. Secondary analyses were conducted on pain, disability, health status, and functional work category. Intervention credibility and pain belief manipulation checks were also evaluated. RESULTS: Chi square analyses comparing proportions recovered at 6 months after pain onset for behavioral medicine and attention control participants found relative rates of 52% versus 31% in the modified intent-to-treat sample (P=.09) and 54% versus 23% for those completing all 4 sessions and 6-month follow-up (P=.02). At 12 months, 79% of recovered and 68% of chronic pain participants still met criteria for their respective groups (P<.0001). Recovered participants also had higher rates of functional work status recovery at 12 months (recovered: 96% full duty and 4% light duty; chronic pain: 61% full duty, 18% light duty, and 21% medical discharge, respectively; P=.03). CONCLUSIONS: Early intervention using a behavioral medicine rehabilitation approach may enhance recovery and reduce chronic pain and disability in patients with first-onset, subacute LBP. Effects are stronger for participants attending all 4 sessions and the follow-up assessment.

Women's health content validity of the Family Medicine In-training Examination.

BACKGROUND: Women's health is the field of medicine that addresses the special health care needs of women. It includes conditions more common, different, or unique to women. The primary means of knowledge assessment for family medicine residents is the Family Medicine In-training Examination (FMITE). This study describes the degree to which the FMITE tests residents for knowledge of women's health. METHODS: This was a content validity study using item analysis to identify FMITE women's health questions. The curriculum standard was the 2004 American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) Women's Health Curriculum Guidelines. Two independent reviewers verified the method of identifying women's health questions. The test sample included 3,460 questions (1996-2005 FMITEs). RESULTS: Women's health questions made up 23% of the sample. Content areas and topics from the AAFP curriculum were sampled unevenly. The exam emphasized reproductive health and failed to assess knowledge of older women's health. DISCUSSION: The FMITE does test resident knowledge of the traditional subjects of obstetrics and gynecology but does not provide an adequate assessment of the breadth of knowledge of women's health.

A placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial of nortriptyline for chronic low back pain.

To assess the efficacy of nortriptyline, a tricyclic antidepressant, as an analgesic in chronic back pain without depression, we conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 8-week trial in 78 men recruited from primary care and general orthopedic settings, who had chronic low back pain (pain at T-6 or below on a daily basis for 6 months or longer). Of these 57 completed the trial; of the 21 who did not complete, four were withdrawn because of adverse effects. The intervention consisted of inert placebo or nortriptyline titrated to within the therapeutic range for treating major depression (50-150 ng/ml). The main outcome endpoints were pain (Descriptor Differential Scale), disability (Sickness Impact Profile), health-related quality of life (Quality of Well-Being Scale), mood (Beck Depression Inventory, Spielberger State Anxiety Inventory, Hamilton Anxiety/Depression Rating Scales), and physician rated outcome (Clinical Global Impression). Reduction in pain intensity scores was significantly greater for participants randomized to nortriptyline (difference in mean change 1.68, 95%-0.001, CI -3.36, P = 0.050), with a reduction of pain by 22% compared to 9% on placebo. Reduction in disability marginally favored nortriptyline (P = 0.055), but health-related quality of life, mood, and physician ratings of overall outcome did not differ significantly between treatments. Subgroup analyses of study completers supported the intent-to-treat analysis. Also, completers with radicular pain on nortriptyline (n = 5) had significantly (P < 0.05) better analgesia and overall outcome than did those on placebo (n = 6). The results suggest noradrenergic mechanisms are relevant to analgesia in back pain. This modest reduction in pain intensity suggests that physicians should carefully weigh the risks and benefits of nortriptyline in chronic back pain without depression.

One-year follow-up of first onset low back pain.

Efforts to examine the process and risk of developing chronic back pain have relied generally upon retrospective study of individuals with already established pain. In an alternative approach to understanding the clinical course and evolution of low back disorders, a cohort of 76 men experiencing their first episode of back pain was assessed prospectively at 2, 6 and 12 months following pain onset. Standard measures of pain (Descriptor Differential Scale: DDS), disability (Sickness Impact Profile: SIP), and distress (Beck Depression Inventory: BDI) were employed to classify the sample into five groups: Resolved, Pain Only, Disability/Distress Only, Pain and Mild Disability/Distress, and Clinical Range. At both 6 and 12 months post pain onset, most (78%, 72% respectively) of the sample continued to experience pain. Many also experienced marked disability at 6 months (26%) and 12 months (14%). At 12 months, no participants had worsened relative to the 2-month baseline. Doubly multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVAs) were employed to compare baseline groups (Pain Only, Pain and Mild Disability/Distress, Clinical Range) on the DDS, SIP, and BDI across time. The group by time interaction from 2 through 12 months was reliable, with greatest change occurring in the Clinical Range group in disability and distress; interestingly, the decrease in pain was comparable among all groups. Follow-up tests across measures demonstrated greater change in the early (2-6-month) interval and relative stability in the later (6-12-month) interval. Comparison of those classified as 'improvers' with those who did not improve from 2 to 12 months showed similar findings. The clinical course of first onset back pain may be prolonged for many patients, and involves a continuum of related disability and distress. Individuals at risk for marked symptoms 1 year after an initial episode of back pain can be identified early, and prompt treatment might reduce the risk of pain chronicity.

Workers' Compensation and return-to-work in low back pain.

The relationship of Workers' Compensation and litigation to low back pain (LBP) outcome is not established in the literature. Our study investigated the characteristics of disabled persons applying for Worker's Compensation or employing a lawyer, the factors predicting receipt of compensation, and the effects of compensation and litigation on employment outcome. One hundred sixty-nine unemployed persons with LBP were assessed by medical history, physical exam, biomechanical testing, psychiatric interview, and MMPI. Subjects were asked whether they had applied for compensation, received it, or had employed a lawyer. Six months later, subjects were asked about their employment and compensation status. Neither compensation status nor involvement of a lawyer significantly improved prediction of employment status 6 months later. Receipt of compensation predicted better outcome in those at risk for poor outcome due to external locus of control. Factors predicting failure to obtain compensation over 6 months, having applied, include education, spinal flexion, ability to do daily activities and affective inhibition. Neurological dysfunction did not predict receipt of compensation in univariate or multivariate analyses; emotional distress reduced the probability of receiving compensation, after controlling for severity of spinal dysfunction. Receipt of compensation and use of a lawyer did not reduce the probability of RTW in disabled persons in the present sample, but increased the likelihood of return to work for groups of individuals at higher risk such as those with external locus of control. Although compensation is awarded on the basis of physical evaluation under the present system, the present findings suggest that the likelihood of receiving compensation is also significantly determined by level of emotional distress.