Obstetric interventions and pregnancy outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic in England: A nationwide cohort study

Socioeconomic disparities in changes to preterm birth and stillbirth rates during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: a study of 21 European countries

BACKGROUND

Despite concerns about worsening pregnancy outcomes resulting from healthcare restrictions, economic difficulties and increased stress during the COVID-19 pandemic, preterm birth (PTB) rates declined in some countries in 2020, while stillbirth rates appeared stable. Like other shocks, the pandemic may have exacerbated existing socioeconomic disparities in pregnancy, but this remains to be established. Our objective was to investigate changes in PTB and stillbirth by socioeconomic status (SES) in European countries.

METHODS

The Euro-Peristat network implemented this study within the Population Health Information Research Infrastructure (PHIRI) project. A common data model was developed to collect aggregated tables from routine birth data for 2015-2020. SES was based on mother's educational level or area-level deprivation/maternal occupation if education was unavailable and harmonized into low, medium and high SES. Country-specific relative risks (RRs) of PTB and stillbirth for March to December 2020, adjusted for linear trends from 2015 to 2019, by SES group were pooled using random effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-one countries provided data on perinatal outcomes by SES. PTB declined by an average 4% in 2020 {pooled RR: 0.96 [95% confidence intervals (CIs): 0.94-0.97]} with similar estimates across all SES groups. Stillbirths rose by 5% [RR: 1.05 (95% CI: 0.99-1.10)], with increases of between 3 and 6% across the three SES groups, with overlapping confidence limits.

CONCLUSIONS

PTB decreases were similar regardless of SES group, while stillbirth rates rose without marked differences between groups.

Social distancing and extremely preterm births in the initial COVID-19 pandemic period

HYPOTHESIS

Increased social distancing was associated with a lower incidence of extremely preterm live births (EPLB) during the initial COVID-19 pandemic period.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective study at the NICHD Neonatal Research Network sites comparing EPLB (220/7-286/7 weeks) and extremely preterm intrapartum stillbirths (EPIS) rates during the pandemic period (March-July, weeks 9-30 of 2020) with the reference period (same weeks in 2018 and 2019), correlating with state-specific social distancing index (SDI).

RESULTS

EPLB and EPIS percentages did not significantly decrease (1.58-1.45%, p = 0.07, and 0.08-0.06%, p = 0.14, respectively). SDI was not significantly correlated with percent change of EPLB (CC = 0.29, 95% CI = -0.12, 0.71) or EPIS (CC = -0.23, 95% CI = -0.65, 0.18). Percent change in mean gestational age was positively correlated with SDI (CC = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.07, 0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

Increased social distancing was not associated with change in incidence of EPLB but was associated with a higher gestational age of extremely preterm births.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV ID

Generic Database: NCT00063063.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the circadian rhythm of cesarean section deliveries

Circadian rhythms synchronize all biological functions, enabling humans to foresee and respond better to periodic environmental changes. The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) lockdown regulations significantly changed the lighting conditions in pregnant women, leading to chronological disruption. This study aimed to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 on the circadian rhythm of cesarean deliveries. We investigated whether the circadian rhythm of cesarean section deliveries changed during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic at a tertiary hospital in Van Province, eastern Turkey. We analyzed the distribution of birth times for 1476 cesarean deliveries performed between March 01, 2020 and January 20, 2021 (1st year of the COVID-19 pandemic) and compared this information with data from 1194 cesarean deliveries performed during a similar period in the previous year. The primary outcome was the change in the circadian rhythm of cesarean deliveries. Secondary outcomes included cesarean section (CS) delivery rates, indications for CS, 1st and 5th minutes Appearance (skin color), Pulse (heart rate), Grimace (reflex irritability), Activity (muscle tone), and Respiration scores, and anesthesia technique use rates. Regarding the time distribution of CS deliveries in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, the maximum number of cesarean deliveries (n = 234, 16%) occurred between 14:00 and 16:00 (P = .112). Cesarean deliveries in pre-COVID-19 group were most frequently performed between 10:00 and 12:00, at a rate of 18% (n = 216) (P = .001). In both groups, the time point at which CS deliveries were the least performed was 04:00 to 06:00, and the rates were different (n = 35, 2% and n = 14, 1%, respectively) (P = .022). A 4-hour phase shift was detected at the peak of the birth time in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the previous year. These results suggest that the circadian rhythm of cesarean deliveries is affected by the pandemic.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on infant obesity: A nationwide retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Lifestyle changes, such as those related to the COVID-19 pandemic, including alterations in physical activity and dietary habits, are known to affect pregnancy outcomes. In particular, suboptimal intrauterine conditions during pregnancy are known to influence not only fetal growth but also growth during infancy. However, research on the impact of the environmental changes caused by the COVID-19 pandemic on the growth of infants and children during their early years is lacking. To address this issue, this study evaluated the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on obesity in infants.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used the data collected from the Korea National Health Insurance (KNHI) claims database. The data of 1985,678 women who delivered infants between 2015 and 2021 were collected. Women who delivered during the pandemic and those who delivered during the pre-pandemic period were matched in a 1:1 frequency-matched pair procedure for factors such as age, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, preeclampsia, gestational diabetes mellitus, mode of delivery, gestational age at delivery, offspring sex, and birth weight. Finally, 197,580 women were enrolled. The weight and head circumference of infants (4-6 months of age) of the COVID-19 pandemic group were compared with those of the pre-pandemic group.

RESULTS

The COVID-19 pandemic group infants exhibited significantly higher weight and prevalence of obesity at 4-6 months of age compared to infants in the pre-pandemic group. After adjustment for covariates, pandemic group infants had a higher risk of obesity (odds ratio: 1.54, 95% confidence interval: 1.51-1.57) compared to the pre-pandemic group infants.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a notable impact on the weight of infants aged 4-6 months. This suggests that pandemic conditions may influence the growth of newborns, underscoring the importance of monitoring and assessing trends in the growth of infants born during such crises.

Impact of COVID-19 on gestational diabetes pregnancy outcomes in the UK: A multicentre retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of implementing emergency care pathway(s) for screening, diagnosing and managing women with gestational diabetes (GDM) during COVID-19.

DESIGN

Retrospective multicentre cohort.

SETTING

Nine National Health Service (NHS) Hospital Trusts/Health boards in England and Scotland.

POPULATION

4915 women with GDM pre-pandemic (1 April 2018 to 31 March 2020), and 3467 women with GDM during the pandemic (1 May 2020 to 31 March 2021).

METHODS

We examined clinical outcomes for women with GDM prior to and during the pandemic following changes in screening methods, diagnostic testing, glucose thresholds and introduction of virtual care for monitoring of antenatal glycaemia.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Intervention at birth, perinatal mortality, large-for-gestational-age infants and neonatal unit admission.

RESULTS

The new diagnostic criteria more often identified GDM women who were multiparous, had higher body mass index (BMI) and greater deprivation, and less frequently had previous GDM (all p < 0.05). During COVID, these women had no differences in the key outcome measures. Of the women, 3% were identified with pre-existing diabetes at antenatal booking. Where OGTT continued during COVID, but virtual care was introduced, outcomes were also similar pre- and during the pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

Using HbA1c and fasting glucose identified a higher risk GDM population during the pandemic but this had minimal impact on pregnancy outcomes. The high prevalence of undiagnosed pre-existing diabetes suggests that women with GDM risk factors should be offered HbA1c screening in early pregnancy.

Courage in Decision Making: A Mixed-Methods Study of COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake in Women of Reproductive Age in the U.K

COVID-19 vaccination rates are lower in women of reproductive age (WRA), including pregnant/postpartum women, despite their poorer COVID-19-related outcomes. We evaluated the vaccination experiences of 3568 U.K. WRA, including 1983 women (55.6%) experiencing a pandemic pregnancy, recruited through the ZOE COVID Symptom Study app. Two staggered online questionnaires (Oct-Dec 2021: 3453 responders; Aug-Sept 2022: 2129 responders) assessed reproductive status, COVID-19 status, vaccination, and attitudes for/against vaccination. Descriptive analyses included vaccination type(s), timing relative to age-based eligibility and reproductive status, vaccination delay (first vaccination >28 days from eligibility), and rationale, with content analysis of free-text comments. Most responders (3392/3453, 98.2%) were vaccinated by Dec 2021, motivated by altruism, vaccination supportiveness in general, low risk, and COVID-19 concerns. Few declined vaccination (by Sept/2022: 20/2129, 1.0%), citing risks (pregnancy-specific and longer-term), pre-existing immunity, and personal/philosophical reasons. Few women delayed vaccination, although pregnant/postpartum women (vs. other WRA) received vaccination later (median 3 vs. 0 days after eligibility, p < 0.0001). Despite high uptake, concerns included adverse effects, misinformation (including from healthcare providers), ever-changing government advice, and complex decision making. In summary, most women in this large WRA cohort were promptly vaccinated, including pregnant/post-partum women. Altruism and community benefit superseded personal benefit as reasons for vaccination. Nevertheless, responders experienced angst and received vaccine-related misinformation and discouragement. These findings should inform vaccination strategies in WRA.

Is the surge in cesarean section rates during the COVID-19 pandemic truly substantiated?

BACKGROUND

Cesarean section (C-section) rates, deemed a critical health indicator, have experienced a historical increase. The advent of the COVID-19 pandemic significantly impacted healthcare patterns including delays or lack of follow-up in treatment and an increased number of patients with acute problems in hospitals. This study aimed to explore whether the observed surge is a genuine consequence of pandemic-related factors.

METHODS

This study employs an Interrupted Time Series (ITS) design to analyze monthly C-section rates from March 2018 to January 2023 in Kurdistan province, Iran. Segmented regression modeling is utilized for robust data analysis.

RESULTS

The C-section rate did not show a significant change immediately after the onset of COVID-19. However, the monthly trend increased significantly during the post-pandemic period (p < 0.05). Among primigravid women, a significant monthly increase was observed before February 2020 (p < 0.05). No significant change was observed in the level or trend of C-section rates among primigravid women after the onset of COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

This study underscores the significant and enduring impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in further increasing the C-section rates over the long term, the observed variations in C-section rates among primigravid women indicate that the COVID-19 pandemic had no statistically significant impact.

COVID-19 lockdowns affected birthing outcomes in a regional New South Wales Health District

INTRODUCTION

The 400 000 residents of the Illawarra Shoalhaven Local Health District (ISLHD) experienced two distinct lockdowns aimed at mitigating the transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. Analysing effects of these lockdowns on maternal and neonatal outcomes presents a valuable opportunity to assess the impact of pandemic-level restrictions on maternal and neonatal outcomes.

AIM

Evaluate the impacts of restrictions from two lockdown periods on maternal, birthing, and neonatal outcomes within a regional local health district.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study included 22 166 women who gave birth within ISLHD between 2017 and 2022. Groups included for analysis: Control Group - mothers pregnant before the pandemic (conception before 3 April 2019); Exposure Group 1 - mothers pregnant during the first lockdown (conception date 22 January 2020 to 5 May 2020); and Exposure Group 2 - mothers pregnant during the second lockdown (conception date 30 April 2021 to 13 Sep 2021).

RESULTS

Odds of adverse birthing outcomes including non-reassuring fetal status (odds ratio (OR) 1.34; 95% CI 1.14-1.56 and OR 1.20; 95% CI 1.03-1.40), and postpartum haemorrhage (OR 2.04; 95% CI 1.73-2.41 and OR 1.74; 95% CI 1.48-2.05) were substantially increased in Exposure Groups 1 and 2, respectively. Gestational diabetes, gestational hypertension, low birth weight and admission to neonatal intensive care rates improved.

CONCLUSIONS

Pregnant women exposed to pandemic restrictions within ISLHD had decreased odds of adverse antenatal and neonatal outcomes, but increased odds of poor peripartum outcomes.

Simplified gestational diabetes screening with a triaging fasting plasma glucose reduces the burden of oral glucose tolerance tests during pregnancy - A large tertiary comparative cohort study

AIMS

The study aimed to evaluate the impact of a simplified screeningapproach for gestational diabetes (GDM) compared to conventional screening on OGTT rates, GDM prevalence, and perinatal outcomes.

METHOD

A retrospective comparative cohort study included singleton births from 20 weeks' gestation. Pregnancies without diagnostic glucose results from 13 weeks' gestation or incomplete screenings were excluded. Simplified screening consisted of a triaging fasting plasma glucose (FPG), where only those with FPG levels between 4.7 and 5.0 mmol/L proceeded to the 2hr 75 g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT).The study period was divided into conventional screening (1st January 2019-30th June 2020) and simplified screening (1st January 2021-31st December 2021).

RESULTS

Out of 15,138 pregnancies, 12,035 met the inclusion criteria: 7385 underwent conventional and 4650 underwent simplified screening. In the simplified group, 82.9 % avoided an OGTT. The simplified screening group also had a lower GDM prevalence compared to the conventional group ((18.7 % vs. 21.7 %, p < 0.001). Perinatal outcomes, including the rate of large-for-gestational-age infants, were similar between the groups.

CONCLUSION

The simplified GDM screening strategy for significantly reduced OGTTs by over 80% without impacting perinatal outcomes. It suggests that prospective studies are necessary to further evaluate this approach.

Explaining Iranian midwives' experiences of providing healthcare services during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 has changed and challenged the way health and maternity care is provided. Midwives are among the first and most influential maternity care providers during the COVID-19 pandemic; however, there is inadequate information about their experiences in providing healthcare services, particularly in Iran. The present study was conducted to explain the midwives' experiences of providing healthcare services during the COVID-19 pandemic in Gorgan.

METHODS

The present study was conducted qualitatively through the inductive content analysis method in 2022. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews. A total of 21 individuals were selected as participants using a purposeful method and the maximum diversity strategy.

RESULTS

Data analysis led to the emergence of 377 codes, 12 subcategories, and 3 main categories, including, the laborious occupational challenges for midwives during the pandemic, identifying and creating new opportunities for the development of the midwifery profession, and the lack of perceived organizational and social support.

CONCLUSIONS

During the COVID-19 pandemic, midwives experienced various challenges in providing healthcare services, yet sacrificed themselves to perform their duties and provide quality care incessantly. The COVID-19 pandemic was a combination of laborious occupational challenges and individual and professional growth opportunities for midwives in Iran. Strong and managed organizational support is essential to overcome the crisis, maintain the workforce, and empower them to deal with future crises.

Maternal Characteristics and Outcomes Affected by COVID-19 Pandemic in Indonesia

Aim

Compare the impact of the intervention on the outcome of pregnancy of patients receiving obstetric care with and non-COVID-19 diagnosis at a tertiary referral hospital located in the region of East Java, Indonesia.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional analysis of 694 pregnant women. These patients' information was acquired based on the medical data obtained from the hospital. The Mann-Whitney test was used to analyze the disparities among the factors examined in this research investigation.

Results

There was a statistically significant difference in length of stay (LOS). It has been shown that individuals diagnosed with COVID-19 often exhibit a longer length of stay (LOS) in healthcare facilities compared to those who do not have the infection. More than fifty percent of patients gave birth by cesarean section, 83 in COVID-19 group and 283 in non-COVID-19 group. The most prevalent complications among COVID-19 patients were maternal infectious and parasitic diseases (1.3 vs 0%), prolonged labor (12.3 vs 9.6%) and puerperal complications (0.6 vs 0%). In 40.9% of COVID-19 patients, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) was encountered. Infection due to COVID-19 had no discernible impact on the outcomes of pregnancy.

Conclusion

Numerous interventions, including cesarean delivery in COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients, require reevaluation. It is imperative to undertake a comprehensive reassessment of the health care delivery system, with particular emphasis on enhancing the efficacy of the referral system.

Intrapartum ultrasound and mother acceptance: A study with informed consent and questionnaire

Introduction

Intrapartum ultrasound (IU) is used in the delivery ward; even if IU monitors the labouring women, it could be perceived as a discomfort and even as an" obstetric violence", because it is a young technique, not often well "accepted". A group of clinicians aimed at obtain an informed consent from patients, prior to perform a translabial ultrasound (TU). The aim of this study was to evaluate the acceptance of both translabial and transabdominal IU.

Methods

In this study, performed at the University Hospital of Bari (Unit of Obstetrics and Gynecology), were enrolled 103 patients in the first or second stage of labor in singleton cephalic presentation. A statistical frequency and an association analysis were performed. As a significant result, we consider the peace of mind/satisfaction and the" obstetric violence". IU was performed both transabdominal and translabial to determine the presentation, head positions, angle of progression and head perineum distance. During the first and second stage of labor, the ASIUG questionnaires (Apulia study intrapartum ultrasonography group) were administered.

Results

74 (71, 84%) patients underwent IU and 29 had a vaginal examination (28, 15%). Significant less "violence" has been experienced with a IU (73 out 74/98, 65%) and only one person (1 /1, 35%) recorded that. On the contrary, 10 patients (10/29) perceived that "violence" (34, 48%) while 19 (65, 52%) did not respond on a similar way, after a vaginal examination (VE). More patients felt satisfaction (71 out 74/95, 95%) with the use of IU and only 3 (3/4, 05%) felt unease. A different picture was evident in the vaginal examination group. Only 17 patients (17 out 29/58, 62%) felt comfort while 12 (41, 38%) felt unease.

Conclusions

In our study, IU use is well accepted by most of patients, because it could reassure women about their fetal condition. Moreover, they can see the fetus on the screen, while the obstetrician is performing the US and this is important for a visual feedback, in comparison with the classical VE.

Caesarean sections before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in western Sydney, Australia

BACKGROUND

To determine the changes in emergency and elective caesarean section (CS) rates since the COVID-19 pandemic, identify the groups most affected, and examine changes in the factors associated with CS rates, and reasons for CS.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using routinely collected data of 22,346 births from before the pandemic (January 2018-February 2020) and 18,597 births during the pandemic (March 2020-December 2021). Data were analysed using multinominal logistic regression.

RESULTS

The CS rate increased by 4.1% (from 30.1% to 34.2%), reflecting increases of 2.3% in emergency CS (from 11.5% to 13.8%) and 1.7% in elective CS (from 18.7% to 20.4%). Large groups with notable increases were women who were nulliparous (7.2% increase), from South Asia (6.0%), obese (5.2%) and giving birth at a small hospital (6.1%). Compared to pre-pandemic, the relative risk of an emergency CS versus a vaginal delivery increased 1.36 times (adjusted relative risk ratio (aRRR) = 1.36; 95% CI = 1.27, 1.45) and the risk of having an elective CS increased 1.11 times (aRRR = 1.11; 95% CI = 1.04, 1.20). Factors associated with both emergency and elective CS were age, region of birth, reproductive history, body mass index, hypertension, diabetes, mode of antenatal care and hospital. Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas and antenatal care were only associated with elective CS. Baby gender was only associated with emergency CS. Preterm gestation at delivery was associated with reduced emergency but increased elective CS. Foetal compromise was the most common indication for emergency CS (43.2%) and increased the most (8.0%). Previous CS was the most common indication for elective CS (61.5%) and reduced the most (1.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Both emergency and elective CS rates increased significantly during the pandemic, with the former increasing at a higher rate. The persistent upward trend of CS rates, exacerbated by increasing proportions of nulliparous women undergoing CSs, is concerning.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Births, Vaginal Deliveries, Cesarian Sections, and Maternal Mortality in a Brazilian Metropolitan Area: A Time-Series Cohort Study

Purpose

The COVID-19 pandemic posed a worldwide challenge, leading to radical changes in healthcare. The primary objective of the study was to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on birth, vaginal delivery, and cesarian section (c-section) rates. The secondary objective was to compare the maternal mortality before and after the pandemic.

Patients and Methods

Time-series cohort study including data of all women admitted for childbirth (vaginal delivery or c-section) at the maternities in the Public Health System of Federal District, Brazil, between March 2018 and February 2022, using data extracted from the Hospital Information System of Brazilian Ministry of Health (SIH/DATASUS) on September 30, 2022. Causal impact analysis was used to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on birth, vaginal delivery, and c-section using the CausalImpact R package, and a propensity score matching was used to evaluate the effect on maternal mortality rate using the Easy R (EZR) software.

Results

There were 150,617 births, and considering total births, the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic was not statistically significant (absolute effect per week: 5.5, 95% CI: -24.0-33.4). However, there was an increase in c-sections after COVID-19 (absolute effect per week: 18.1; 95% CI: 11.9-23.9). After propensity score matching, the COVID-19 period was associated with increased maternal mortality (OR: 3.22, 95% CI: 1.53-6.81). The e-value of the adjusted OR for the association between the post-COVID-19 period and maternal mortality was 5.89, with a 95% CI: 2.43, suggesting that unmeasured confounders were unlikely to explain the entirety of the effect.

Conclusion

Our study revealed a rise in c-sections and maternal mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic, possibly due to disruptions in maternal care. These findings highlight that implementing effective strategies to protect maternal health in times of crisis and improve outcomes for mothers and newborns is crucial.

The coronavirus disease 2019 infection in pregnancy and adverse pregnancy outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak which started in December 2019 rapidly developed into a global health concern. Pregnant women are susceptible to respiratory infections and can experience adverse outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared pregnancy outcomes according to COVID-19 disease status. The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant articles published between December 1, 2019, and October 19, 2022. Main inclusion criterion was any population-based, cross-sectional, cohort, or case-control study that assessed pregnancy outcomes in women with or without laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. Sixty-nine studies including 1,606,543 pregnant women (39,716 [2.4%] diagnosed with COVID-19) were retrieved. COVID-19-infected pregnant women had a higher risk of preterm birth (odds ratio [OR], 1.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.42-1.78), preeclampsia (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.30-1.53), low birth weight (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.30-1.79), cesarean delivery (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.10-1.30), stillbirth (OR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.39-2.10), fetal distress (OR, 2.49; 95% CI, 1.54-4.03), neonatal intensive care unit admission (OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.72-3.16), perinatal mortality (OR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.15-3.34), and maternal mortality (OR, 6.15; 95% CI, 3.74-10.10). There were no significant differences in total miscarriage, preterm premature rupture of membranes, postpartum hemorrhage, cholestasis, or chorioamnionitis according to infection. This review demonstrates that COVID-19 infection during pregnancy can lead to adverse pregnancy outcomes. This information could aid researchers and clinicians in preparing for another pandemic caused by newly discovered respiratory viruses. The findings of this study may assist with evidence-based counseling and help clinicians manage pregnant women with COVID-19.

Induction of labour at 39 weeks and adverse outcomes in low-risk pregnancies according to ethnicity, socioeconomic deprivation, and parity: A national cohort study in England

BACKGROUND

Ethnic and socioeconomic inequalities in obstetric outcomes are well established. However, the role of induction of labour (IOL) to reduce these inequalities is controversial, in part due to insufficient evidence. This national cohort study aimed to identify adverse perinatal outcomes associated with IOL with birth at 39 weeks of gestation ("IOL group") compared to expectant management ("expectant management group") according to maternal characteristics in women with low-risk pregnancies.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

All English National Health Service (NHS) hospital births between January 2018 and March 2021 were examined. Using the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) dataset, maternal and neonatal data (demographic, diagnoses, procedures, labour, and birth details) were linked, with neonatal mortality data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS). Women with a low-risk pregnancy were identified by excluding pregnancies with preexisting comorbidities, previous cesarean section, breech presentation, placenta previa, gestational diabetes, or a baby with congenital abnormalities. Women with premature rupture of membranes, placental abruption, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, amniotic fluid abnormalities, or antepartum stillbirth were excluded only from the IOL group. Adverse perinatal outcome was defined as stillbirth, neonatal death, or neonatal morbidity, the latter identified using the English composite neonatal outcome indicator (E-NAOI). Binomial regression models estimated risk differences (with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)) between the IOL group and the expectant management group, adjusting for ethnicity, socioeconomic background, maternal age, parity, year of birth, and birthweight centile. Interaction tests examined risk differences according to ethnicity, socioeconomic background, and parity. Of the 1 567 004 women with singleton pregnancies, 501 072 women with low-risk pregnancies and with sufficient data quality were included in the analysis. Approximately 3.3% of births in the IOL group (1 555/47 352) and 3.6% in the expectant management group (16 525/453 720) had an adverse perinatal outcome. After adjustment, a lower risk of adverse perinatal outcomes was found in the IOL group (risk difference -0.28%; 95% CI -0.43%, -0.12%; p = 0.001). This risk difference varied according to socioeconomic background from 0.38% (-0.08%, 0.83%) in the least deprived to -0.48% (-0.76%, -0.20%) in the most deprived national quintile (p-value for interaction = 0.01) and by parity with risk difference of -0.54% (-0.80%, -0.27%) in nulliparous women and -0.15% (-0.35%, 0.04%) in multiparous women (p-value for interaction = 0.02). There was no statistically significant evidence that risk differences varied according to ethnicity (p = 0.19). Key limitations included absence of additional confounding factors such as smoking, BMI, and the indication for induction in the HES datasets, which may mean some higher risk pregnancies were included.

CONCLUSIONS

IOL with birth at 39 weeks was associated with a small reduction in the risk of adverse perinatal outcomes, with 360 inductions in low-risk pregnancies needed to avoid 1 adverse outcome. The risk reduction was mainly present in women from more socioeconomically deprived areas and in nulliparous women. There was no significant risk difference found by ethnicity. Increased uptake of IOL at 39 weeks, especially in women from more socioeconomically deprived areas, may help reduce inequalities in adverse perinatal outcomes.

Assessing safe and personalised maternity and neonatal care through a pandemic: a case study of outcomes and experiences in two trusts in England using the ASPIRE COVID-19 framework

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in profound and far-reaching impacts on maternal and newborn care and outcomes. As part of the ASPIRE COVID-19 project, we describe processes and outcome measures relating to safe and personalised maternity care in England which we map against a pre-developed ASPIRE framework to establish the potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic for two UK trusts.

METHODS

We undertook a mixed-methods system-wide case study using quantitative routinely collected data and qualitative data from two Trusts and their service users from 2019 to 2021 (start and completion dates varied by available data). We mapped findings to our prior ASPIRE conceptual framework that explains pathways for the impact of COVID-19 on safe and personalised care.

RESULTS

The ASPIRE framework enabled us to develop a comprehensive, systems-level understanding of the impact of the pandemic on service delivery, user experience and staff wellbeing, and place it within the context of pre-existing challenges. Maternity services experienced some impacts on core service coverage, though not on Trust level clinical health outcomes (with the possible exception of readmissions in one Trust). Both users and staff found some pandemic-driven changes challenging such as remote or reduced antenatal and community postnatal contacts, and restrictions on companionship. Other key changes included an increased need for mental health support, changes in the availability and uptake of home birth services and changes in induction procedures. Many emergency adaptations persisted at the end of data collection. Differences between the trusts indicate complex change pathways. Staff reported some removal of bureaucracy, which allowed greater flexibility. During the first wave of COVID-19 staffing numbers increased, resolving some pre-pandemic shortages: however, by October 2021 they declined markedly. Trying to maintain the quality and availability of services had marked negative consequences for personnel. Timely routine clinical and staffing data were not always available and personalised care and user and staff experiences were poorly captured.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 crisis magnified pre-pandemic problems and in particular, poor staffing levels. Maintaining services took a significant toll on staff wellbeing. There is some evidence that these pressures are continuing. There was marked variation in Trust responses. Lack of accessible and timely data at Trust and national levels hampered rapid insights. The ASPIRE COVID-19 framework could be useful for modelling the impact of future crises on routine care.

WILL (When to induce labour to limit risk in pregnancy hypertension): Protocol for a multicentre randomised trial

OBJECTIVES

To address optimal timing of birth for women with chronic or gestational hypertension who reach term and remain well.

STUDY DESIGN

Pragmatic, non-masked randomised trial.

INCLUSION

maternal age ≥16 years, chronic or gestational hypertension, singleton pregnancy, live fetus, 36⁺⁰-37⁺⁶ weeks' gestation, and able to give documented informed consent.

EXCLUSION

contraindication to either trial arm (e.g., pre-eclampsia or another indication for birth at term), blood pressure (BP) ≥ 160/110 mmHg until controlled, major fetal anomaly anticipated to require neonatal care unit admission, or participation in another timing of birth trial. Randomisation (1:1 ratio, minimised for key prognostic variables: site, hypertension type, and prior Caesarean) to 'planned early term birth at 38^+0-3 weeks' or 'usual care at term' (revised from 'expectant care until at least 40⁺⁰ weeks', Aug 2022).

OUTCOMES

Maternal co-primary: composite of 'poor maternal outcome' (severe hypertension, maternal death, or maternal morbidity). Neonatal co-primary: neonatal care unit admission for ≥4 h. Each co-primary is measured until primary hospital discharge or 28 days post-birth (whichever is earlier). Key secondary: Caesarean birth.

ANALYSIS

Sample of 1080 participants (540/arm) will detect an 8% reduction in the maternal co-primary (90% power, superiority hypothesis), and give 94% power for a between-group non-inferiority margin of difference of 9% in the neonatal co-primary. Analysis will be by intention-to-treat. Ethics approval has been obtained (NHS Health Research Authority London Fulham Research Ethics Committee, 18/LO/2033).

CONCLUSIONS

The study will provide data for women to make informed choices about their care and allow health systems to plan services.

The Temporal Relationship Between the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic and Preterm Birth

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether preterm birth rates changed in relation to the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and whether any change depended on socioeconomic status.

METHODS

This is an observational cohort study of pregnant individuals with a singleton gestation who delivered in the years 2019 and 2020 at 1 of 16 U.S. hospitals of the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. The frequency of preterm birth for those who delivered before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic (ie, in 2019) was compared with that of those who delivered after its onset (ie, in 2020). Interaction analyses were performed for people of different individual- and community-level socioeconomic characteristics (ie, race and ethnicity, insurance status, Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) of a person's residence).

RESULTS

During 2019 and 2020, 18,526 individuals met inclusion criteria. The chance of preterm birth before the COVID-19 pandemic was similar to that after the onset of the pandemic (11.7% vs 12.5%, adjusted relative risk 0.94, 95% CI 0.86-1.03). In interaction analyses, race and ethnicity, insurance status, and the SVI did not modify the association between the epoch and the chance of preterm birth before 37 weeks of gestation (all interaction P >.05).

CONCLUSION

There was no statistically significant difference in preterm birth rates in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic onset. This lack of association was largely independent of socioeconomic indicators such as race and ethnicity, insurance status, or SVI of the residential community in which an individual lived.

An increase in cesarean section rate during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic in Iran

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on healthcare services is likely to affect birth outcomes including the delivery mode. However, recent evidence has been conflicting in this regard. The study aimed to assess changes to C-section rate during the COVID-19 pandemic in Iran.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of electronic medical records of women delivered in the maternity department of hospitals in all provinces of Iran before the COVID-19 pandemic (February-August 30, 2019) and during the pandemic (February-August 30, 2020). Data were collected through the Iranian Maternal and Neonatal Network (IMAN), a country-wide electronic health record database management system for maternal and neonatal information. A total of 1,208,671 medical records were analyzed using the SPSS software version 22. The differences in C-section rates according to the studied variables were tested using the χ2 test. A logistic regression analysis was conducted to determine the factors associated with C-section.

RESULTS

A significant rise was observed in the rates of C-section during the pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic (52.9% vs 50.8%; p = .001). The rates for preeclampsia (3.0% vs 1.3%), gestational diabetes (6.1% vs 3.0%), preterm birth (11.6% vs 6.9%), IUGR (1.2% vs 0.4%), LBW (11.2% vs 7.8%), and low Apgar score at first minute (4.2% vs 3.2%) were higher in women who delivered by C-section compared to those with normal delivery (P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The overall C-section rate during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic was significantly higher than the pre-pandemic period. C-section was associated with adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. Thus, preventing the overuse of C-section especially during pandemic becomes an urgent need for maternal and neonatal health in Iran.

COVID-19 pandemic and neonatal birth weight: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Lockdown was implemented in many countries during the pandemic, which led to myriad changes in pregnant women's lives. However, the potential impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on neonatal outcomes remain unclear. We aimed to evaluate the association between the pandemic and neonatal birth weight.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of the previous literature.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE and Embase databases up to May 2022 and extracted 36 eligible studies that compared neonatal birth weight between the pandemic and the prepandemic period. The following outcomes were included: mean birth weight, low birth weight (LBW), very low birth weight (VLBW), macrosomia, small for gestational age (SGA), very small for gestational age (VSGA), and large for gestational age (LGA). Statistical heterogeneity among studies was assessed to determine whether a random effects model or fixed effects model was conducted.

RESULTS

Of the 4514 studies identified, 36 articles were eligible for inclusion. A total of 1,883,936 neonates during the pandemic and 4,667,133 neonates during the prepandemic were reported. We identified a significant increase in mean birth weight (pooled mean difference [95% confidence interval (CI)] = 15.06 [10.36, 19.76], I² = 0.0%, 12 studies) and a reduction in VLBW (pooled OR [95% CI] = 0.86 [0.77, 0.97], I² = 55.4%, 12 studies). No overall effect was identified for other outcomes: LBW, macrosomia, SGA, VSGA, and LGA. There was publication bias for mean birth weight with a borderline significance (Egger's P = 0.050).

CONCLUSION

Pooled results showed the pandemic was significantly associated with an increase in mean birth weight and a reduction in VLBW, but not for other outcomes. This review provided clues about the indirect effects of the pandemic on neonatal birth weight and more healthcare measures needed to improve neonatal long-term health.

Computation of the distribution of model accuracy statistics in machine learning: Comparison between analytically derived distributions and simulation-based methods

Background and Aims

All fields have seen an increase in machine-learning techniques. To accurately evaluate the efficacy of novel modeling methods, it is necessary to conduct a critical evaluation of the utilized model metrics, such as sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC). For commonly used model metrics, we proposed the use of analytically derived distributions (ADDs) and compared it with simulation-based approaches.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the England National Health Services Heart Disease Prediction Cohort. Four machine learning models (XGBoost, Random Forest, Artificial Neural Network, and Adaptive Boost) were used. The distribution of the model metrics and covariate gain statistics were empirically derived using boot-strap simulation (N = 10,000). The ADDs were created from analytic formulas from the covariates to describe the distribution of the model metrics and compared with those of bootstrap simulation.

Results

XGBoost had the most optimal model having the highest AUROC and the highest aggregate score considering six other model metrics. Based on the Anderson-Darling test, the distribution of the model metrics created from bootstrap did not significantly deviate from a normal distribution. The variance created from the ADD led to smaller SDs than those derived from bootstrap simulation, whereas the rest of the distribution remained not statistically significantly different.

Conclusions

ADD allows for cross study comparison of model metrics, which is usually done with bootstrapping that rely on simulations, which cannot be replicated by the reader.

Lessons from digital technology-enabled health interventions implemented during the coronavirus pandemic to improve maternal and birth outcomes: a global scoping review

BACKGROUND

Timely access to essential obstetric and gynecologic healthcare is an effective method for improving maternal and neonatal outcomes; however, the COVID-19 pandemic impacted pregnancy care globally. In this global scoping review, we select and investigate peer-reviewed empirical studies related to mHealth and telehealth implemented during the pandemic to support pregnancy care and to improve birth outcomes.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL and Web of Science for this Review because they include peer-reviewed literature in the disciplines of behavioral sciences, medicine, clinical sciences, health-care systems, and psychology. Because our investigative searches reviewed that there is considerable 'grey literature' in this area; we did not restrict our review to any study design, methods, or place of publication. In this Review, peer-reviewed preprints were comparable to published peer-reviewed articles, with relevant articles screened accordingly.

RESULTS

The search identified 1851 peer reviewed articles, and after removal of duplicates, using inclusion and exclusion criteria, only 22 studies were eligible for inclusion in the review published from January 2020 to May 2022. mHealth interventions accounted for 72.7% (16 of 22 studies) and only 27.3% (6 of 22 studies) were telehealth studies. There were only 3 example studies that integrated digital technologies into healthcare systems and only 3 studies that developed and evaluated the feasibility of mobile apps. Experimental studies accounted 68.8% of mHealth studies and only 33.3% studies of telehealth studies. Key functionalities of the pregnancy apps and telehealth platforms focused on mental and physical wellness, health promotion, patient tracking, health education, and parenting support. Implemented interventions ranged from breastfeeding and selfcare to behavioral health. Facilitators of uptake included perceived benefits, user satisfaction and convenience. Mobile apps and short messaging services were the primary technologies employed in the implemented mHealth interventions.

CONCLUSION

Although our Review emphasizes a lack of studies on mHealth interventions and data from pregnant women during the COVID-19 crisis, the review shows that implementation of digital health interventions during emergencies are inevitable given their potential for supporting pregnancy care. There is also a need for more randomized clinical trials and longitudinal studies to better understand the effectiveness and feasibility of implementing such interventions during disease outbreaks and emergencies.

How does COVID-19 affect maternal and neonatal outcomes?

OBJECTIVES

In this article, we aimed to evaluate the most recent information on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the health of mothers and their babies.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search by utilizing online sources. Scientific papers that were written in English on the effects of COVID-19 on both mother and their newborn were assessed.

RESULTS

COVID-19 can be fatal, especially in pregnant women with accompanying chronic diseases. The timing and mode of delivery should be decided by the status of the mother and fetus instead of SARS-CoV-2 positivity in pregnant women. At the nursery, routine separation of SARS-CoV-2 positive mothers and their infants is not recommended. However, it is important to take preventive measures to reduce the risk of transmission. The advantages of breastfeeding seem to outweigh the potential dangers of viral transmission. Neonatal COVID-19 infections may cause different clinical pictures from asymptomatic infections to life-threatening diseases. International health authorities specifically recommend that pregnant and lactating women get vaccinated to diminish the risk of transmission of the virus to the mother and fetus, not giving preference to a certain vaccine. It is prudent to apply universal screening only in populations with a high prevalence of COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare professionals should carefully manage the perinatal period during the COVID-19 outbreak, using the most up-to-date information to protect and promote maternal and newborn health. Further scientific studies are needed to clarify the early and long-term effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on maternal-neonatal morbidity and mortality.

National surveillance data analysis of COVID-19 vaccine uptake in England by women of reproductive age

Women of reproductive age are a group of particular concern with regards to vaccine uptake, related to their unique considerations of menstruation, fertility, and pregnancy. To obtain vaccine uptake data specific to this group, we obtained vaccine surveillance data from the Office for National Statistics, linked with COVID-19 vaccination status from the National Immunisation Management Service, England, from 8 Dec 2020 to 15 Feb 2021; data from 13,128,525 such women at population-level, were clustered by age (18-29, 30-39, and 40-49 years), self-defined ethnicity (19 UK government categories), and index of multiple deprivation (IMD, geographically-defined IMD quintiles). Here we show that among women of reproductive age, older age, White ethnicity and being in the least-deprived index of multiple deprivation are each independently associated with higher vaccine uptake, for first and second doses; however, ethnicity exerts the strongest influence (and IMD the weakest). These findings should inform future vaccination public messaging and policy.

COVID-19 induced birth sex ratio changes in England and Wales

Background

The sex ratio at birth (male live births divided by total live births) may be a sentinel health indicator. Stressful events reduce this ratio 3-5 months later by increasing male fetal loss. This ratio can also change 9 months after major population events that are linked to an increase or decrease in the frequency of sexual intercourse at the population level, with the ratio either rising or falling respectively after the event. We postulated that the COVID-19 pandemic may have affected the ratio in England and Wales.

Methods

Publicly available, monthly live birth data for England and Wales was obtained from the Office for National Statistics up to December 2020. Using time series analysis, the sex ratio at birth for 2020 (global COVID-19 onset) was predicted using data from 2012-2019. Observed and predicted values were compared.

Results

From 2012-2020 there were 3,133,915 male and 2,974,115 female live births (ratio 0.5131). Three months after COVID-19 was declared pandemic (March 2020), there was a significant fall in the sex ratio at birth to 0.5100 in June 2020 which was below the 95% prediction interval of 0.5102-0.5179. Nine months after the pandemic declaration, (December 2020), there was a significant rise to 0.5171 (95% prediction interval 0.5085-0.5162). However, December 2020 had the lowest number of live births of any month from 2012-2020.

Conclusions

Given that June 2020 falls within the crucial window when population stressors are known to affect the sex ratio at birth, these findings imply that the start of the COVID-19 pandemic caused population stress with notable effects on those who were already pregnant by causing a disproportionate loss of male fetuses. The finding of a higher sex ratio at birth in December 2020, i.e., 9 months after COVID-19 was declared a pandemic, could have resulted from the lockdown restrictions that initially spurred more sexual activity in a subset of the population in March 2020.

Viral pulmonary infection in pregnancy - Including COVID-19, SARS, influenza A, and varicella

The COVID-19 pandemic has been at the forefront of medicine over the last few years. Pregnant women are often exposed to infectious agents that can be harmful not only to the mother but also to the foetus. Moreover, changes during pregnancy means that pregnant women have increased vulnerability to viral infections, especially pulmonary infections. Epidemiological studies have shown a link between maternal viral infections and miscarriage, preterm birth as well as congenital defects. With potential poor outcomes for both women and their newborns, having a good understanding of the presentation and management of these viral pulmonary infections is essential. The increased risk of adverse outcomes has been highlighted during the COVID-19, SARS and H1N1 influenza pandemics.

Impacts of COVID-19 pandemic on preterm birth: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly affected healthcare systems and daily well-being. However, the reports of the indirect impacts of the pandemic on preterm birth remain conflicting. We performed a meta-analysis to examine whether the pandemic altered the risk of preterm birth.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of the previous literature.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and Embase databases until March 2022 using appropriate keywords and extracted 63 eligible studies that compared preterm between the COVID-19 pandemic period and the prepandemic period. A random effects model was used to obtain the pooled odds of each outcome. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (No. CRD42022326717).

RESULTS

The search identified 3827 studies, of which 63 reports were included. A total of 3,220,370 pregnancies during the COVID-19 pandemic period and 6,122,615 pregnancies during the prepandemic period were studied. Compared with the prepandemic period, we identified a significant decreased odds of preterm birth (PTB; <37 weeks' gestation; pooled odds ratio [OR; 95% confidence interval (CI)] = 0.96 [0.94, 0.98]; I² = 78.7%; 62 studies) and extremely PTB (<28 weeks' gestation; pooled OR [95% CI] = 0.92 [0.87, 0.97]; I² = 26.4%; 25 studies) during the pandemic, whereas there was only a borderline significant reduction in the odds of very PTB (<32 weeks' gestation; pooled OR [95% CI] = 0.93 [0.86, 1.01]; I² = 90.1%; 33 studies) between the two periods. There was significant publication bias for PTB.

CONCLUSION

Pooled results suggested the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with preterm birth, although there was only a borderline significant reduction for very PTB during the pandemic compared with the prepandemic period. Large studies showed conflicting results, and further research on whether the change is related to pandemic mitigation measures was warranted.

Fetal death after the introduction of COVID-19 mitigation measures in Sweden, Denmark and Norway: a registry-based study

It remains unclear whether the rate of fetal death has changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. We assessed the impact of COVID-19 mitigation measures on fetal death in Sweden (449,347 births), Denmark (290,857 pregnancies) and Norway (261,057 pregnancies) using robust population-based registry data. We used Cox regression to assess the impact of the implementation of pandemic mitigation measures on March 12th, 2020, on miscarriage (fetal loss before gestational week 22) and stillbirth (fetal loss after gestational week 22). A total of 11% of 551,914 pregnancies in Denmark and Norway ended in miscarriage, while the proportion of stillbirths among 937,174 births across the three countries was 0.3%. There was no difference in the risk of fetal death during the year following pandemic mitigation measures. For miscarriage, the combined hazard ratio (HR) for Norway and Denmark was 1.01 (95% CI 0.98, 1.03), and for stillbirth, the combined HR for all three countries was 0.99 (95% CI 0.89, 1.09). We observed a slightly decreased risk of miscarriage during the first 4 months, with an HR of 0.94 (95% CI 0.90, 0.99) after lockdown. In conclusion, the risk of fetal death did not change after the implementation of COVID-19 pandemic mitigation measures in the three Scandinavian countries.

Pregnancy outcomes in Italy during COVID-19 pandemic: a population-based cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the estimates of preterm birth (PTB; 22-36 weeks gestational age, GA) and stillbirth rates during COVID-19 pandemic in Italy with those recorded in the three previous years.

DESIGN

A population-based cohort study of liveborn and stillborn infants was conducted using data from Regional Health Systems and comparing the pandemic period (March 1st , 2020-March 31st , 2021, N= 362,129) to an historical period (January 2017- February 2020, N=1,117,172). The cohort covered 84.3% of the births in Italy.

METHODS

Poisson regressions were run in each Region and meta-analyses were performed centrally. We used an interrupted time series regression analysis to study the trend of preterm births from 2017 to 2021.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes were PTB and stillbirths. Secondary outcomes were late PTB (32-36 weeks' GA), very PTB (<32 weeks' GA), and extremely PTB (<28 weeks' GA), overall and stratified into singleton and multiples.

RESULTS

The pandemic period compared with the historical one was associated with a reduced risk for PTB (Risk Ratio: 0.91; 95% Confidence Interval, CI: 0.88, 0.93), late PTB (0.91; 0.88, 0.94), very PTB (0.88; 0.84, 0.91), and extremely PTB (0.88; 0.82, 0.95). In multiples, point estimates were not very different, but had wider CIs. No association was found for stillbirths (1.01; 0.90, 1.13). A linear decreasing trend in PTB rate was present in the historical period, with a further reduction after the lockdown.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated a decrease in PTB rate after the introduction of COVID-19 restriction measures, without an increase in stillbirths.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on midwifery-led service provision in the United Kingdom in 2020-21: findings of three national surveys

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic required all healthcare systems to adapt quickly. There is some evidence about the impact of the pandemic on United Kingdom maternity services overall, but little is known about the impact on midwifery-led services, including midwifery units and home birth services.

Objective

To describe changes to midwifery-led service provision in the United Kingdom and the Channel Islands during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Design

Three national surveys were circulated using the United Kingdom Midwifery Study System (UKMidSS) and the Royal College of Midwives (RCM) Heads and Directors of Midwifery Network. The UKMidSS surveys took place in wave 1 (April to June 2020) and in wave 2 (February to March 2021). The RCM survey was conducted in April 2020.

Findings

The response rate to the UKMidSS surveys was 84% in wave 1 and 70% in wave 2, while 48% of Heads and Directors of Midwifery responded to the RCM survey. Around 60% of midwifery units reported being open as usual in wave 1, with the remainder affected by closures. Fewer unit closures (15%) were reported in the wave 2 survey. Around 40% of services reported some reduction in home birth services in wave 1, compared with 15% in wave 2. The apparent impact of the pandemic varied widely across the four nations of the United Kingdom and within the English regions.

Conclusions

The pandemic led to increased centralisation of maternity care and the disruption of midwifery-led services, especially in the first wave. Further research should focus on the reasons behind closures, the regional variation and the impact on maternity care experience and outcomes.