Obstetric A&E unit admission and hospitalization for obstetrical management during COVID-19 pandemic in a third-level hospital of southern Italy

Hospitalizations for Obstetrical Conditions During and After the Covid-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

During the Covid-19 pandemic there have been a drastic decrease in hospitalizations for non-Covid conditions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the trend in hospitalizations for obstetrical conditions during and after the Covid-19 pandemic.

METHODS

For this study there we used electronical data base in order to search for all the obstetrical patients that were hospitalized in a tertiary maternity, Clinical Emergency County Hospital Craiova, during the pre-pandemic period (between March - December 2019), during pandemics (2020 March - December, 2021 March - December) and post pandemics (2022 March - December).

RESULTS

The total number of hospitalizations during 2020 dropped by 28% compared to the pre-pandemic year - 2019, and further by 30% in 2021, and by 26% in 2022. In terms of day admissions, a decreasing trend can be observed, with a total of 3230 admissions, from which, 208 in 2020 showing a decrease of 93%, 695 in 2021 with a decrease of 78% and 941 in 2022 with a decrease of 70% compared to 2019.We experienced a significant increase of vaginal birth rate during the pandemic (2020-2021) of 24% that can be attributed to the unavailability of many surrounding low-risk birth units during the pandemic.

CONCLUSION

The obstetrical conditions hospitalizations dramatically dropped during the COVID-19 pandemic and have not yet recovered to the pre-pandemic level.

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on obstetrics and gynecology hospitalization rate and on reasons for seeking emergency care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

During the lockdown due to COVID-19 pandemic, utilization of emergency care units has been reported to be reduced for obstetrical and gynaecological reasons. The aim of this systematic review is to assess if this phenomenon reduced the rate of hospitalizations for any reason and to evaluate the main reasons for seeking care in this subset of the population.

METHODS

The search was conducted using the main electronic databases from January 2020 to May 2021. The studies were identified with the use of a combination of: "emergency department" OR "A&E" OR "emergency service" OR "emergency unit" OR "maternity service" AND "COVID-19" OR "COVID-19 pandemic" OR "SARS-COV-2" and "admission" OR "hospitalization". All the studies that evaluated women going to obstetrics & gynecology emergency department (ED) during the COVID-19 pandemic for any reason were included.

RESULTS

The pooled proportion (PP) of hospitalizations increased from 22.7 to 30.6% during the lockdown periods, in particular from 48.0 to 53.9% for delivery. The PP of pregnant women suffering from hypertensive disorders increased (2.6 vs 1.2%), as well as women having contractions (52 vs 43%) and rupture of membranes (12.0 vs 9.1%). Oppositely, the PP of women having pelvic pain (12.4 vs 14.4%), suspected ectopic pregnancy (1.8 vs 2.0), reduced fetal movements (3.0 vs 3.3%), vaginal bleeding both for obstetrical (11.7 vs 12.8%) and gynecological issues (7.4 vs 9.2%) slightly reduced.

CONCLUSION

During the lockdown, an increase in the proportion of hospitalizations for obstetrical and gynecological reasons has been registered, especially for labor symptoms and hypertensive disorders.

Obstetric and Gynecological Admissions and Hospitalizations in an Italian Tertiary-Care Hospital during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Retrospective Analysis According to Restrictive Measures

BACKGROUND

The national lockdown and the different restrictions applied in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic brought several changes to hospitalization procedures. The aim of this study was to evaluate the patterns in access to emergency services and hospitalization in a tertiary-care obstetric and gynecological emergency department (OG-ED) throughout the restrictions applied during 2020.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective comparative study on data from January to December 2020 was carried out on the following timeframes: January to February 2020 (before COVID-19 pandemic), March to June 2020 (nationwide lockdown period), July to September 2020 (removal of restrictive measures), October to December 2020 (regional lockdown) and compared to the same periods of 2019. All obstetric and gynecological patients with complete medical data admitted to the OG-ED were included.

RESULTS

Overall, 4233 accesses for 2019 and 3652 for 2020 were reported, with a decreasing trend of -13.7%. Between March and June 2020 (nationwide lockdown) and 2019, the overall number of patients attending the OG-ED decreased compared to July-September and October-December differences (Δ -23.5% vs. -3.1% and -5.9%; p = 0.001 respectively) for 2020-2019, but this reduction was not statistically significant when compared to January-February (Δ -23.5% vs. -18.5%; p = 0.356). No significant differences for obstetric patients (Δ -1.8% vs. -1.0% vs. -2.3% and +1.9% respectively; p = 0.883) were noted. Hospitalizations showed a stable trend with an increase between October-December 2019 and 2020 (Δ +4.6%; p = 0.001 vs. January-February (+2.4%) and March-June (+2.6%) 2019-2020), mainly related to regional lockdowns.

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to available national studies, in our institution, the overall rate of OG-ED admissions was slightly reduced with a similar trend of decrease even before COVID-19, with an increase in admissions for serious issues, despite expectations that the suspension of elective admissions and outpatient services would have led to an increase in non-urgent hospitalizations during the COVID-19 lockdown period.

COVID-19 incidence in women of reproductive age: a population-based study in Reggio Emilia, northern Italy

BACKGROUND

Despite being at higher risk of severe disease and pregnancy complications, evidence on susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy is still limited. The aim of the study is to compare the likelihood of undergoing a SARS-CoV-2 test and testing positive for COVID-19 in pregnancy and puerperium with that of the general female population of reproductive age.

METHODS

This is a retrospective population-based cohort study including 117,606 women of reproductive age (March 2020-September 2021) with 6608 (5.6%) women having ≥ 1 pregnancy. Women were linked to the pregnancy registry to be classified as "non-pregnant", "pregnant", and "puerperium"; then, according to the national case-based integrated COVID-19 surveillance system, all women undergoing a SARS-CoV-2 test during the study period were identified. The Incidence Rate Ratio was calculated to compare the likelihood of being tested for SARS-CoV-2 in pregnant, puerperium and non-pregnant women among all women included. The likelihood of having a COVID-19 diagnosis was calculated using two comparators (not-pregnant women and the person-time before/after pregnancy) by means of Cox proportional hazards models, adjusting for age and with the cluster option to control standard error calculation in repeated pregnancies. Only first infection and swabs before the first one positive were included.

RESULTS

The probability of being tested for SARS-CoV-2 was 4.9 (95% CI: 4.8-5.1) and 3.6 times higher (95%CI: 3.4-3.9) in pregnancy (including spontaneous miscarriages) and in the puerperium, respectively. The Hazard Ratio (HR) of covid-19 diagnosis during pregnancy vs. non-pregnancy was 1.17 (95% CI 1.03-1.33) with similar results when comparing the risk during pregnancy with that of the same women outside pregnancy (puerperium excluded), with an HR of 1.13 (95% CI 0.96-1.33); the excess decreased when excluding the test performed at admission for delivery (HR 1.08 (95%CI 0.90-1.30). In the puerperium, the HR was 0.62 (95% CI 0.41-0.92) comparing women with ≥ 1childbirth with all other women and excluding the first two weeks of puerperium.

CONCLUSIONS

Women during pregnancy showed a small increase in the risk of infection, compatible with a higher likelihood of being tested. A lower probability of infection during the puerperium was observed during the entire pandemic period, suggesting likely protective behaviors which were effective in reducing their probability of infection.

Trends of surgical-care delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic: A multi-centre study in India (IndSurg Collaboration)

Context

The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent lockdowns adversely affected global healthcare services to varying extents. To accommodate its added burden, emergency services were affected along-with elective surgeries.

Aims

To quantify and analyze the trends of essential surgeries and bellwether procedures during the waxing and waning of the pandemic, across various hospitals in India.

Settings and Design

Multi-centric retrospective study.

Methods and Material

A research consortium led by World Health Organization (WHO) Collaboration Center (WHOCC) for Research in Surgical Care Delivery in Low-and Middle-Income countries, India, conducted this study with 5 centers. All surgeries performed during April 2020 (Wave I), November 2020 (Recovery I), and April 2021 (Wave II) were compared with those performed in April 2019 (pre-pandemic period).

Statistical Analysis Used

Microsoft Excel 2019 and SPSS Version 20.

Results

The total number of surgeries reduced by 77% during Wave I, which improved to a 52% reduction in Recovery I compared to the pre-pandemic period. However, surgeries were reduced again during Wave II to 68%, but the reduction was less compared to Wave I. Emergency and essential surgeries were affected along with the elective ones but to a lesser extent.

Conclusions

The present study has quantified the effects of the pandemic on surgical-care delivery across a timeline and documented a reduction in overall surgical volumes during the peaks of the pandemic (Wave I and II) with minimal improvement as the surge of COVID-19 cases declined (Recovery II). The surgical volumes improved during the second wave compared to the first one which may be attributable to better preparedness. Cesarean sections were affected the least.

Maternal near miss: before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare Maternal Near Miss prevalence and outcomes before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

METHODS

This retrospective study was carried out in a university maternity hospital of high complexity. The population was divided into two groups: G1, 1 year before the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic period (August 2018-July 2019) and G2, 1 year during the pandemic period (August 2020-July 2021). All pregnant/postpartum women hospitalized up to 42 days after the end of pregnancy/childbirth were included, and pregnant women who were admitted with coronavirus disease 2019/flu symptoms were excluded. The association of variables with "Maternal Near Miss" was estimated using logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 568 women from G1 and 349 women from G2 fulfilled the Maternal Near Miss criteria. The prevalence of Maternal Near Miss in pre-pandemic was 144.1/1,000 live births and during the pandemic was 78.5/1,000 live births. In the analysis adjusted for G1, the factors of days of hospitalization (PR: 1.02, CI: 1.0-1.0, p<0.05), pre-eclampsia (PR: 0.41, CI: 1.4-2.2, p<0.05), and sepsis/severe systemic infection (PR: 1.79, CI: 0.3-0.4, p<0.05) were crucial for women with the Maternal Near Miss condition to have a greater chance of being admitted to the intensive care unit. In G2, low education (PR: 0.45, CI: 0.2-0.9, p<0.05), eclampsia (PR: 5.28, CI: 3.6-7.6, p<0.05), and use of blood products (PR: 6.48, CI: 4.7-8.8, p<0.05) increased the risk of admission to the intensive care unit.

CONCLUSION

During the pandemic, there was a lower prevalence of Maternal Near Miss in high-risk pregnancies, fewer hospitalizations, and more deaths compared to the non-pandemic period.

Depression and anxiety in women with malignant ovarian germ cell (MOGCT) and sex cord stromal tumors (SCST): an analysis of the AGO-CORSETT database

INTRODUCTION

The intention of this study was to evaluate the level of anxiety and depression of malignant ovarian germ cell (MOGCT) and sex cord stromal tumors (SCST) survivors and to identify possible alterable cofactors.

METHODS

CORSETT was an observational, multicenter, mixed retrospective/prospective cohort study of the AGO Studygroup. Women who had been diagnosed with MOGCTs and SCSTs between 2001 and 2011 were asked to complete the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) to evaluate distress. Predictors of distress (type of surgery, chemotherapy, time since diagnosis, recurrence, second tumor, pain) were investigated using multivariate linear regression analysis.

RESULTS

150 MOGCT and SCST patients with confirmed histological diagnosis completed the questionnaire median seven years after diagnosis. They had a HADS total score ≥ 13 indicating severe mental distress in 34% of cases. Patients after fertility-conserving surgery had lower probability of severe mental distress than those without fertility-conserving treatment (β = - 3.1, p = 0.04). Pain was associated with the level of distress in uni- and multivariate analysis (coef 0.1, p < 0.01, coef. Beta 0.5).

DISCUSSION

Severe mental distress was frequent in patients with MOGCT and SCST and the level of pain was associated with the level of distress. Fertility conserving therapy, however, was associated with less mental distress. Screening and treatment of pain and depression is required to improve mental well-being in survivors of MOGCT and SCST.

Do Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Monoclonal Antibodies Have an Impact on Pregnancy Outcome? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have been used as a rescue strategy for pregnant women affected by COVID-19. To explore its impact on maternal-fetal health, we included all observational studies reporting maternal, fetal, delivery and neonatal outcomes in women who underwent mAbs infusion for COVID-19. Primary outcome was the percentage of preterm delivery. We used meta-analyses of proportions to combine data for maternal, fetal, delivery and neonatal outcome of women treated with mAbs for COVID-19 and reported pooled proportions and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for categorical variables or mean difference (MD) with their 95% confidence intervals for continuous variables. Preterm birth was observed in 22.8% of cases (95% CI 12.9-34.3). Fetal distress was reported in 4.2% (95% CI 1.6-8.2). Gestational hypertension and pre-eclampsia were observed in 3.0% (95% CI 0.8-6.8) and 3.4% (95% CI 0.8-7.5) of cases, respectively. Fetal growth restriction was observed in 3.2% of fetuses (95% CI 0.8-7.0). Secondary prophylaxis with mAbs is currently considered the best treatment option for people with mild to moderate COVID-19 disease. More attention should be paid to infants born from mothers who were treated with mAbs, for the risk of immunosuppression.

COVID-19 vaccine and pregnancy outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To explore perinatal outcomes in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-vaccinated pregnant women compared with unvaccinated counterparts.

METHODS

Search was conducted using Web of Science, Scopus, ClinicalTrial.gov, MEDLINE, Embase, OVID, and Cochrane Library as electronic databases. We included observational studies evaluating pregnant women undergoing SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and compared pregnancy and perinatal outcomes with those in unvaccinated women. Categorical variables were assessed using odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI), whereas for continuous variables, the results were expressed as mean difference with their 95% CI. All analyses were performed by adopting the random effect model of DerSimonian and Laird.

RESULTS

There was no difference in the probability of having a small-for-gestational-age fetus (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.85-1.09; P = 0.570), but we observed a reduced probability of a non-reassuring fetal monitoring, a reduced gestational age at delivery, and a reduced probability of premature delivery in vaccinated pregnant women versus unvaccinated ones.

CONCLUSION

The probability of small for gestational age is similar between vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnant women, and the former also had a slightly reduced rate of premature delivery.

Trends in Caesarean Section Rate According to Robson Group Classification among Pregnant Women with SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Single-Center Large Cohort Study in Italy

BACKGROUND

Since there is no available data on temporal trends of caesarean section (CS) rates in pregnant women with COVID-19 through the pandemic, we aimed to analyze the trends in caesarean section rate in a large cohort of pregnant women with COVID-19, according to the Robson Ten Group Classification System of deliveries.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled pregnant women with a diagnosis of COVID-19 who delivered in our center between March 2020 and November 2021. Deliveries were classified, according to the Robson group classification, and according to three time periods: (1) deliveries from March 2020 to December 2020; (2) deliveries from January 2021 to April 2021; (3) deliveries from May 2021 to November 2021. We compared pregnancy characteristics and incidence of caesarean section, according to the Robson category in the total population, and according to the three time periods.

RESULTS

We included 457 patients matching the inclusion criteria in our analysis. We found that overall CS rate significantly decreased over time from period 1 to period 3 (152/222, 68.5% vs. 81/134, 60.4% vs. 58/101, 57.4%, χ2 = 4.261, p = 0.039). CS rate significantly decreased over time in Robson category 1 (48/80, 60% vs. 27/47,57.4% vs. 8/24, 33.3%, χ2 = 4.097, p = 0.043) and Robson category 3 (13/42, 31% vs. 6/33, 18.2% vs. 2/22, 9.1%, χ2 = 4.335, p = 0.037). We also found that the incidence of induction of labor significantly increased over time (8/222, 3.6% vs. 12/134, 9% vs. 11/101, 10.9%, χ2 = 7.245, p = 0.027).

CONCLUSION

Our data provide an overview of the temporal changes in the management and obstetric outcome of COVID-19 pregnant women through the pandemic, confirming that standards of obstetrical assistance for pregnancies complicated by SARS-CoV-2 infection improved over time.

Worldwide beliefs among pregnant women on SARS-CoV-2 vaccine: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

SARS-CoV-2 vaccine has been recommended to pregnant women, but survey studies showed contrasting findings worldwide in relation to the willingness to accept vaccination during pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the evidence from the literature regarding the acceptance rate of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in pregnant and breastfeeding women.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a systematic review on the main databases (MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, ISI Web of Science) searching for all the peer-reviewed survey studies analyzing the eventual acceptance rate of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine among pregnant and breastfeeding women. To combine data meta-analyses of proportions and pooled proportions with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

15 studies including 25,839 women were included in the analysis. The proportion of women actually willing to be vaccinated during pregnancy is 49.1% (95% CI, 42.3-56.0), and the proportion of breastfeeding women is 61.6% (95% CI, 50.0-75.0).

CONCLUSION

The cumulative SARS-CoV-2 vaccine acceptance rate among pregnant women appears still low. Vaccinal campaign are urgently needed to drive more confidence into the vaccine to help reducing the spread of the infection and the possible consequences during pregnancy.

Worldwide beliefs among pregnant women on SARS-CoV-2 vaccine: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

SARS-CoV-2 vaccine has been recommended to pregnant women, but survey studies showed contrasting findings worldwide in relation to the willingness to accept vaccination during pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the evidence from the literature regarding the acceptance rate of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in pregnant and breastfeeding women.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a systematic review on the main databases (MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, ISI Web of Science) searching for all the peer-reviewed survey studies analyzing the eventual acceptance rate of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine among pregnant and breastfeeding women. To combine data meta-analyses of proportions and pooled proportions with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

15 studies including 25,839 women were included in the analysis. The proportion of women actually willing to be vaccinated during pregnancy is 49.1% (95% CI, 42.3-56.0), and the proportion of breastfeeding women is 61.6% (95% CI, 50.0-75.0).

CONCLUSION

The cumulative SARS-CoV-2 vaccine acceptance rate among pregnant women appears still low. Vaccinal campaign are urgently needed to drive more confidence into the vaccine to help reducing the spread of the infection and the possible consequences during pregnancy.