Newborn drug testing practices in Iowa birthing hospitals

Maternal and infant cannabis testing and associated birth outcomes

OBJECTIVES

The objective of the study was to determine any identifiable clinical utility of the practice of universal maternal and infant tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) testing at the time of birth.

METHODS

This was cross-sectional, retrospective cohort study comparing the following birth outcomes in relation to maternal and infant tetrahydrocannabinol (THC): APGAR scores, cord gases, NICU admission and need for immediate resuscitation. All births at the University of Maryland Medical Center between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2020 were reviewed. Those that had either maternal or infant test results missing were excluded. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA v27. Birth outcomes were adjusted for gestational age at delivery and tobacco use. Infant resuscitation was considered the need for any respiratory support.

RESULTS

A total of 4260 maternal/infant pairs were included. Of these, 314 (7.4%) birthing parents and 161 (3.8%) of infants tested positive for THC. Of the birth parents who tested positive for THC, 51.3% of their infants also tested positive for THC. Maternal/infant pairs that both tested positive for THC had the lowest need for immediate resuscitation and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit admission. Cord gases and APGAR scores were similar between the groups. Birth parents who tested positive for THC delivered infants at an earlier gestational age (37w6d v 38w5d, p = 0.001) and lower mean birth weight (2690gm v 3061gm, p = 0.001) than those who tested negative even after adjusting for confounders. When limited to only term births and broken down by weeks completed gestation, the mean birth weights were lower for every week in those who tested positive for THC versus those who tested negative.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that maternal and neonatal testing for THC at the time of birth is not predictive of important neonatal outcome parameters. Therefore, even though it is likely that there are some effects of in utero THC exposure on the neonate, we did not find any clinical benefits that would justify routine maternal and/or infant testing for THC at the time of birth.

Drug Testing Practices and Policies of Labor and Delivery Units Across the Southeastern United States

OBJECTIVE

To describe drug testing practices used in labor and delivery units in seven southeastern U.S. states (Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee), determine what risk factors prompt drug testing, and determine whether selective policies or factors that prompt testing differ based on hospital characteristics (type, size, or predominant payer source).

DESIGN

Cross-sectional descriptive design.

SETTING

Labor and delivery units in seven southeastern U.S. states.

PARTICIPANTS

Nurse administrators of labor and delivery units (N = 49) who responded for their units.

METHODS

We used a purposive sampling technique to construct a database of hospitals with obstetric services and e-mail addresses for nurse administrators. We created a 35-item survey to collect hospital characteristics and drug testing policy information. We distributed the survey to 291 nurse administrators.

RESULTS

We received 49 responses (response rate = 16.8%). Respondents reported that 63% (31/49) of hospitals were not-for-profit, 87% (40/46) had Medicaid as the predominant payer source, 80% (37/46) had a formal perinatal drug testing policy, and 61% (30/49) used selective drug testing protocols. Current or past history of substance use was reported as the risk factor that most often prompted drug testing. We did not find any differences in hospital characteristics (type, size, or predominant payer source) that prompted testing.

CONCLUSION

Most respondents reported that their labor and delivery units had a written drug testing policy and often used selective drug testing protocols. Drug testing protocols did not differ based on hospital type, size, or predominant payer source. Nurses have a role in implementing a best practice with unit-based drug testing.

Development and Implementation of State and Federal Child Welfare Laws Related to Drug Use in Pregnancy

Policy Points Over the past several decades, states have adopted policies intended to address prenatal drug use. Many of these policies have utilized existing child welfare mechanisms despite potential adverse effects. Recent federal policy changes were intended to facilitate care for substance-exposed infants and their families, but state uptake has been incomplete. Using legal mapping and qualitative interviews, we examine the development of state child welfare laws related to substance use in pregnancy from 1974 to 2019, with a particular focus on laws adopted between 2009 and 2019. Our findings reveal policies that may disincentivize treatment-seeking and widespread implementation challenges, suggesting a need for new treatment-oriented policies and refined state and federal guidance.

CONTEXT

Amid increasing drug use among pregnant individuals, legislators have pursued policies intended to reduce substance use during pregnancy. Many states have utilized child welfare mechanisms despite evidence that these policies might disincentivize treatment-seeking. Recent federal changes were intended to facilitate care for substance-exposed infants and their families, but implementation of these changes at the state level has been slowed and complicated by existing state policies. We seek to provide a timeline of state child welfare laws related to prenatal drug use and describe stakeholder perceptions of implementation.

METHODS

We catalogued child welfare laws related to prenatal drug use, including laws that defined child abuse and neglect and established child welfare reporting standards, for all 50 states and the District of Columbia (DC), from 1974 to 2019. In the 19 states that changed relevant laws between 2009 and 2019, qualitative interviews were conducted with stakeholders to capture state-level perspectives on policy implementation.

FINDINGS

Twenty-four states and DC have passed laws classifying prenatal drug use as child abuse or neglect. Thirty-seven states and DC mandate reporting of suspected prenatal drug use to the state. Qualitative findings suggested variation in implementation within and across states between 2009 and 2019 and revealed that implementation of changes to federal law during that decade, intended to encourage states to provide comprehensive social services and linkages to evidence-based care to drug-exposed infants and their families, has been complicated by existing policies and a lack of guidance for practitioners.

CONCLUSIONS

Many states have enacted laws that may disincentivize treatment-seeking among pregnant people who use drugs and lead to family separation. To craft effective state laws and support their implementation, state policymakers and practitioners could benefit from a treatment-oriented approach to prenatal substance use and additional state and federal guidance.

Neonatal abstinence syndrome: Effectiveness of targeted umbilical cord drug screening

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to determine if targeted drug screening of newborns was effective in identifying a positive drug test result.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective cross-sectional study. A total of 340 infants met criteria for drug screening. Sensitivity and specificity were used to evaluate each of the potential risk factors in terms of their ability to predict a positive drug test result. Two-sample t-tests were used to compare differences in Finnegan scores between babies with a positive drug test result and those with a negative one.

RESULT

The risk factor with the highest sensitivity was maternal history of drug use. The difference in the Finnegan scores between groups was statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

The risk factors associated with this study were not very sensitive. The only way to identify all infants at risk of NAS is to standardize the screening process and apply to all infants.

A socioecological framework for engaging substance-using pregnant persons in longitudinal research: Multi-stakeholder perspectives

OBJECTIVE

Understanding the impact of substance use during pregnancy on fetal development and child health is essential for designing effective approaches for reducing prenatal substance exposures and improving child outcomes. Research on the developmental impacts of prenatal substance exposure has been limited by legal, ethical, and practical challenges. This study examined approaches to engage substance-using (with an emphasis on opioids) pregnant persons in longitudinal research, from multi-stakeholder perspectives.

METHODS

The present study solicited the expertise of 1) an advisory group of community stakeholders, including people with lived experienced of opioid/substance use; and 2) an online survey with content experts. Qualitative analysis examined facilitators and barriers to recruiting and retaining substance-using pregnant persons through a socioecological lens at the individual, interpersonal, organizational, community, and policy levels.

RESULTS

Stakeholders (N = 19) prioritized stigma, loss of confidentiality, legal consequences, and instability (e.g., homelessness and poverty) as important barriers that prevent substance-using persons from enrolling in research studies. Of 70 survey respondents, most self-identified as researchers (n = 37), followed by clinicians (n = 19), and 'others' (n = 14). Survey respondents focused on retention strategies that build trusting relationships with participants, including incentives (e.g., transportation and childcare support), participant-friendly study design, and team-related factors, (e.g., attitudes and practices).

CONCLUSION

The stakeholder input and survey data offer key insights strengthening our understanding of facilitators and barriers to research participation, and ways to overcome barriers among substance-using pregnant persons. A socioecological framework can be used to identify and address these factors to increase recruitment and long-term retention of high-risk populations.

Concordance and discordance between maternal and newborn drug test results

BACKGROUND

Screening for substance use is recommended during pregnancy, and many clinicians rely on urine drug screening to identify newborns at potential risk for withdrawal.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the concordance and discordance rates between maternal and neonatal drug testing at or near the time of delivery.

STUDY DESIGN

This retrospective chart review was performed at a single institution that employs universal testing for those who consent. Results of maternal and neonatal urine drug testing via immunoassay at delivery were compared.

RESULTS

Of 1573 singleton pregnancies, 233 mothers (14.8%) had a positive test result for any substance and 102 of their newborns (43.8%) had concordant positive test results. Of the 285 positive maternal test results for individual substances, 133 (46.7%) were concordant with newborn test results. After removing iatrogenic positives, there were 84 truly discordant pairs representing 5.9% of the total cohort of test pairs, but 29.5% of the pairs with maternal positive test results. When considering the outcome of a newborn positive test result, the overall sensitivity and specificity for the maternal test were 21.1% and 85.8%, respectively. The positive and negative predictive values were 46.7% and 96.4%, respectively. After excluding iatrogenic positive test results, the sensitivity and specificity for maternal testing were 97.8% and 99.4%, respectively, and the negative predictive value of maternal testing for all substances approached 100%. A total of 11 pairs of twins had at least 1 twin with a positive drug test result, and of these, 6 twin pairs (54.5%) had drug test results that were discordant from each other.

CONCLUSION

There is a high rate of iatrogenic discrepancy in maternal and neonatal drug testing. After adjusting for iatrogenic positive test results, the negative predictive value of maternal testing is high. Many discrepancies, such as those in twins, remained unexplained by medication administration, and potential reasons for these discrepancies warrant further investigation.

Intrauterine Substance Exposure and the Risk for Subsequent Physical Abuse Hospitalizations

OBJECTIVE

To describe the relative risk for a physical abuse hospitalization among substance exposed infants (SEI) with and without neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS).

METHODS

We created a nationally representative US birth cohort using the 2013 and 2014 Nationwide Readmissions Databases. International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes were used to identify newborns, predictor variables, and subsequent hospitalizations for physical abuse within 6 months of discharge from newborns' birth hospitalization. Predictor variables included newborn demographics, prematurity or low birth weight, and intrauterine substance exposure: non-SEI, SEI without NAS, and SEI with NAS. Multiple logistic regression calculated adjusted relative risks and 95% confidence intervals. A subanalysis of newborns with narcotic exposure was performed.

RESULTS

There were 3,740,582 newborns in the cohort; of which 13,024 (0.4%) were SEI without NAS and 20,196 (0.5%) SEI with NAS. Overall, 1247 (0.03%) newborns were subsequently hospitalized for physical abuse within 6 months. Compared to non-SEI, SEI with NAS (adjusted relative risks: 3.84 [95% confidence intervals: 2.79-5.28]) were at increased risk for having a subsequent hospitalization for physical abuse, but SEI without NAS were not. A similar pattern was observed among narcotic-exposed infants; infants with NAS due to narcotics were at increased risk, but narcotic-exposed infants without NAS were not.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that newborns diagnosed with NAS are at increased risk of physical abuse during early infancy, above that of substance-exposed infants without NAS. These results should improve the identification of higher-risk infants who may benefit from more rigorous safety planning and follow-up care.