-
Nursing Interventions to Facilitate the Grieving Process after Perinatal Death: A Systematic Review.International Journal of Environmental... May 2021Perinatal death is the death of a baby that occurs between the 22nd week of pregnancy (or when the baby weighs more than 500 g) and 7 days after birth. After perinatal... (Review)
Review
Perinatal death is the death of a baby that occurs between the 22nd week of pregnancy (or when the baby weighs more than 500 g) and 7 days after birth. After perinatal death, parents experience the process of perinatal grief. Midwives and nurses can develop interventions to improve the perinatal grief process. The aim of this review was to determine the efficacy of nursing interventions to facilitate the process of grief as a result of perinatal death. A systematic review of the literature was carried out. Studies that met the selection criteria underwent a quality assessment using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool. Four articles were selected out of the 640 found. Two are quasi-experimental studies, and two are randomized controlled clinical studies. The interventions that were analyzed positively improve psychological self-concept and role functions, as well as mutual commitment, depression, post-traumatic stress and symptoms of grief. These interventions are effective if they are carried out both before perinatal loss and after it has occurred. The support of health professionals for affected parents, their participation in the loss, expressing feelings and emotions, using distraction methods, group sessions, social support, physical activity, and family education are some of the effective interventions.
Topics: Emotions; Female; Grief; Humans; Parturition; Perinatal Death; Pregnancy; Social Support
PubMed: 34073728
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18115587 -
International Journal of Gynaecology... Oct 2022To evaluate the risk levels for maternal and perinatal complications at > 40, > 45 and > 50 years old compared with younger controls. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the risk levels for maternal and perinatal complications at > 40, > 45 and > 50 years old compared with younger controls.
METHODS
Electronic databases were searched from their inception until March 2021. We included studies reporting pregnancy outcome in pregnant women aged 40, 45, and 50 years or older compared with controls at the time of delivery. Case reports and case series were excluded. The primary outcome was the incidence of stillbirth. Meta-analysis was performed using the random effects model of DerSimonian and Laird, to produce summary treatment effects in terms of relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity was measured using I (Higgins I ). Subgroup analyses in women older than 45 years and in those older than 50 years were performed.
RESULTS
Twenty-seven studies, including 31 090 631 women, were included in the meta-analysis. The overall quality of the included studies was moderate to high. Most of the included studies were retrospective cohort studies (21/27), four were population-based studies, and two were cross-sectional studies. Women aged ≥40 years had significantly higher risk of stillbirth (RR 2.16, 95% CI 1.86-2.51), perinatal mortality, intrauterine growth restriction, neonatal death, admission to neonatal intensive care unit, pre-eclampsia, preterm delivery, cesarean delivery, and maternal mortality compared with women younger than 40 years old (RR 3.18, 95% CI 1.68-5.98). The increased risks for maternal mortality were 42.76 and 11.60 for women older than 50 years and for those older than 45 years, respectively, whereas those for stillbirth were 3.72 and 2.32. The risk of stillbirth and cesarean delivery was significantly higher in women >45 years compared with those aged 40-45 years, and in those aged >50 years compared with those aged 45-50 years. The risk of maternal mortality was significantly higher in women aged >50 years compared with those aged 40-45 (RR 60.40, 95% CI 13.28-274.74).
CONCLUSION
The risk of stillbirth, cesarean delivery, and maternal mortality increases with advancing maternal age. The risk ratios for maternal mortality were 3.18, 11.60, and 42.76 in women older than 40, older than 45, and older than 50 years, respectively. These data should be used when women with advanced maternal age are counseled regarding their risk in pregnancy.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
The review was registered with the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (registration No.: CRD42020208788).
Topics: Adult; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Maternal Age; Middle Aged; Perinatal Death; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcome; Premature Birth; Retrospective Studies; Stillbirth
PubMed: 35044694
DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.14100 -
International Journal of Environmental... May 2020Perinatal death (PD) is a painful experience, with physical, psychological and social consequences in families. Each year, there are 2.7 million perinatal deaths in the...
BACKGROUND
Perinatal death (PD) is a painful experience, with physical, psychological and social consequences in families. Each year, there are 2.7 million perinatal deaths in the world and about 2000 in Spain. The aim of this study was to explore, describe and understand the impact of perinatal death on parents' social and family life.
METHODS
A qualitative study based on Gadamer's hermeneutic phenomenology was used. In-depth interviews were conducted with 13 mothers and eight fathers who had suffered a perinatal death. Inductive analysis was used to find themes based on the data.
RESULTS
Seven sub-themes emerged, and they were grouped into two main themes: 1) perinatal death affects family dynamics, and 2) the social environment of the parents is severely affected after perinatal death.
CONCLUSIONS
PD impacts the family dynamics of the parents and their family, social and work environments. Parents perceive that society trivializes their loss and disallows or delegitimizes their grief.
IMPLICATIONS
Social care, health and education providers should pay attention to all family members who have suffered a PD. The recognition of the loss within the social and family environment would help the families to cope with their grief.
Topics: Adaptation, Psychological; Adult; Fathers; Female; Grief; Humans; Male; Mothers; Perinatal Death; Pregnancy; Social Support; Spain
PubMed: 32422977
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17103421 -
The New England Journal of Medicine Mar 2023The use of azithromycin reduces maternal infection in women during unplanned cesarean delivery, but its effect on those with planned vaginal delivery is unknown. Data... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
The use of azithromycin reduces maternal infection in women during unplanned cesarean delivery, but its effect on those with planned vaginal delivery is unknown. Data are needed on whether an intrapartum oral dose of azithromycin would reduce maternal and offspring sepsis or death.
METHODS
In this multicountry, placebo-controlled, randomized trial, we assigned women who were in labor at 28 weeks' gestation or more and who were planning a vaginal delivery to receive a single 2-g oral dose of azithromycin or placebo. The two primary outcomes were a composite of maternal sepsis or death and a composite of stillbirth or neonatal death or sepsis. During an interim analysis, the data and safety monitoring committee recommended stopping the trial for maternal benefit.
RESULTS
A total of 29,278 women underwent randomization. The incidence of maternal sepsis or death was lower in the azithromycin group than in the placebo group (1.6% vs. 2.4%), with a relative risk of 0.67 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56 to 0.79; P<0.001), but the incidence of stillbirth or neonatal death or sepsis was similar (10.5% vs. 10.3%), with a relative risk of 1.02 (95% CI, 0.95 to 1.09; P = 0.56). The difference in the maternal primary outcome appeared to be driven mainly by the incidence of sepsis (1.5% in the azithromycin group and 2.3% in the placebo group), with a relative risk of 0.65 (95% CI, 0.55 to 0.77); the incidence of death from any cause was 0.1% in the two groups (relative risk, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.51 to 2.97). Neonatal sepsis occurred in 9.8% and 9.6% of the infants, respectively (relative risk, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.10). The incidence of stillbirth was 0.4% in the two groups (relative risk, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.53); neonatal death within 4 weeks after birth occurred in 1.5% in both groups (relative risk, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.24). Azithromycin was not associated with a higher incidence in adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS
Among women planning a vaginal delivery, a single oral dose of azithromycin resulted in a significantly lower risk of maternal sepsis or death than placebo but had little effect on newborn sepsis or death. (Funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and others; A-PLUS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03871491.).
Topics: Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Azithromycin; Perinatal Death; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious; Sepsis; Stillbirth; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Delivery, Obstetric; Neonatal Sepsis; Administration, Oral; Pregnancy Outcome; United States
PubMed: 36757318
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2212111 -
Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology :... Apr 2023Universal screening for cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in pregnancy is not recommended in most countries. One of the major deterrents is the lack of effective prenatal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Universal screening for cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in pregnancy is not recommended in most countries. One of the major deterrents is the lack of effective prenatal therapy. The role of valacyclovir therapy in reducing the risk of vertical transmission, symptomatic congenital CMV infection and adverse outcome is controversial. The main aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the safety and effectiveness of prenatal valacyclovir therapy in pregnancies with maternal CMV infection.
METHODS
MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched. The inclusion criteria were pregnancy with confirmed maternal CMV infection, treated or untreated with valacyclovir. The primary outcome was the incidence of congenital CMV infection confirmed by a positive CMV polymerase chain reaction result of the amniotic fluid. The secondary outcomes were symptomatic and asymptomatic infection, perinatal death, termination of pregnancy, anomalies detected on follow-up ultrasound, on fetal magnetic resonance imaging or at birth, severe and mild-to-moderate symptoms due to congenital CMV infection, neurological, visual and hearing symptoms, and adverse events related to valacyclovir. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) or Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool, as appropriate. Head-to-head meta-analyses were used to compare the risk of each of the explored outcomes according to whether pregnancies with maternal CMV infection were treated with prenatal valacyclovir therapy.
RESULTS
Eight studies (620 women) were included. Pregnancies treated with valacyclovir had a significantly lower risk of congenital CMV infection compared with those not receiving valacyclovir (three studies; 325 fetuses; pooled odds ratio (OR), 0.37 (95% CI, 0.21-0.64); I = 0%; P < 0.001). When stratifying the analysis according to gestational age at maternal infection, the risk of vertical transmission was significantly lower in pregnancies receiving valacyclovir following first-trimester maternal infection (three studies; 184 fetuses; pooled OR, 0.34 (95% CI, 0.15-0.74); I = 20.9%; P = 0.001), while there was no significant difference between the two groups in those acquiring CMV infection in the periconceptional period or in the third trimester of pregnancy. Only one study reported on the risk of vertical transmission in women infected in the second trimester, demonstrating a lower risk of congenital infection in women taking valacyclovir, although this was based on a small number of cases. Pregnancies treated with valacyclovir therapy had an increased likelihood of asymptomatic congenital CMV infection compared with those not receiving valacyclovir (two studies; 132 fetuses; pooled OR, 2.98 (95% CI, 1.18-7.55); I = 0%; P = 0.021), while there was no significant difference between the two groups in the risk of perinatal death (P = 0.923), termination of pregnancy (P = 0.089), anomalies detected at follow-up imaging assessment during pregnancy or at birth (P = 0.934) and symptoms due to CMV infection in the newborn (P = 0.092). The occurrence of all adverse events in pregnant individuals taking valacyclovir was 3.17% (95% CI, 1.24-5.93%) (six studies; 210 women), with 1.71% (95% CI, 0.41-3.39%) experiencing acute renal failure, which resolved after discontinuation of the drug. On GRADE assessment, the quality of evidence showing that valacyclovir reduced the risk of congenital CMV infection and adverse perinatal outcome was very low.
CONCLUSIONS
Prenatal valacyclovir administration in pregnancies with maternal CMV infection reduces the risk of congenital CMV infection. Further evidence is needed to elucidate whether valacyclovir can affect the course of infection in the fetus and the risk of symptomatic fetal or neonatal infection. © 2022 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
Topics: Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Amniotic Fluid; Cytomegalovirus Infections; Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical; Perinatal Death; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious; Prenatal Care; Valacyclovir
PubMed: 36484439
DOI: 10.1002/uog.26136 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2023Mechanical methods were the first methods developed to ripen the cervix and induce labour. During recent decades they have been substituted by pharmacological methods.... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Mechanical methods were the first methods developed to ripen the cervix and induce labour. During recent decades they have been substituted by pharmacological methods. Potential advantages of mechanical methods, compared with pharmacological methods may include reduction in side effects that could improve neonatal outcomes. This is an update of a review first published in 2001, last updated in 2012.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effectiveness and safety of mechanical methods for third trimester (> 24 weeks' gestation) induction of labour in comparison with prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) (vaginal and intracervical), low-dose misoprostol (oral and vaginal), amniotomy or oxytocin.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and reference lists of retrieved studies (9 January 2018). We updated the search in March 2019 and added the search results to the awaiting classification section of the review.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Clinical trials comparing mechanical methods used for third trimester cervical ripening or labour induction with pharmacological methods. Mechanical methods include: (1) the introduction of a catheter through the cervix into the extra-amniotic space with balloon insufflation; (2) introduction of laminaria tents, or their synthetic equivalent (Dilapan), into the cervical canal; (3) use of a catheter to inject fluid into the extra-amniotic space (EASI). This review includes the following comparisons: (1) specific mechanical methods (balloon catheter, laminaria tents or EASI) compared with prostaglandins (different types, different routes) or with oxytocin; (2) single balloon compared to a double balloon; (3) addition of prostaglandins or oxytocin to mechanical methods compared with prostaglandins or oxytocin alone.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and assessed risk of bias. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
This review includes a total of 112 trials, with 104 studies contributing data (22,055 women; 21 comparisons). Risk of bias of trials varied. Overall, the evidence was graded from very-low to moderate quality. All evidence was downgraded for lack of blinding and, for many comparisons, the effect estimates were too imprecise to make a valid judgement. Balloon versus vaginal PGE2: there may be little or no difference in vaginal deliveries not achieved within 24 hours (risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 1.26; 7 studies; 1685 women; low-quality evidence) and there probably is little or no difference in caesarean sections (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.09; 28 studies; 6619 women; moderate-quality evidence) between induction of labour with a balloon catheter and vaginal PGE2. A balloon catheter probably reduces the risk of uterine hyperstimulation with fetal heart rate (FHR) changes (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.67; 6 studies; 1966 women; moderate-quality evidence), serious neonatal morbidity or perinatal death (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.93; 8 studies; 2757 women; moderate-quality evidence) and may slightly reduce the risk of aneonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.04; 3647 women; 12 studies; low-quality evidence). It is uncertain whether there is a difference in serious maternal morbidity or death (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.12; 4 studies; 1481 women) or five-minute Apgar score < 7 (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.14; 4271 women; 14 studies) because the quality of the evidence was found to be very low and low, respectively. Balloon versus low-dose vaginal misoprostol: it is uncertain whether there is a difference in vaginal deliveries not achieved within 24 hours between induction of labour with a balloon catheter and vaginal misoprostol (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.39; 340 women; 2 studies; low-quality evidence). A balloon catheter probably reduces the risk of uterine hyperstimulation with FHR changes (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.85; 1322 women; 8 studies; moderate-quality evidence) but may increase the risk of a caesarean section (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.60; 1756 women; 12 studies; low-quality evidence). It is uncertain whether there is a difference in serious neonatal morbidity or perinatal death (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.12 to 2.66; 381 women; 3 studies), serious maternal morbidity or death (no events; 4 studies, 464 women), both very low-quality evidence, and five-minute Apgar score < 7 (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.97; 941 women; 7 studies) and NICU admissions (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.63; 1302 women; 9 studies) both low-quality evidence. Balloon versus low-dose oral misoprostol: a balloon catheter probably increases the risk of a vaginal delivery not achieved within 24 hours (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.46; 782 women, 2 studies, and probably slightly increases the risk of a caesarean section (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.32; 3178 women; 7 studies; both moderate-quality evidence) when compared to oral misoprostol. It is uncertain whether there is a difference in uterine hyperstimulation with FHR changes (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.38; 2033 women; 2 studies), serious neonatal morbidity or perinatal death (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.06; 2627 women; 3 studies), both low-quality evidence, serious maternal morbidity or death (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.52; 2627 women; 3 studies), very low-quality evidence, five-minute Apgar scores < 7 (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.32; 2693 women; 4 studies) and NICU admissions (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.17; 2873 women; 5 studies) both low-quality evidence.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Low- to moderate-quality evidence shows mechanical induction with a balloon is probably as effective as induction of labour with vaginal PGE2. However, a balloon seems to have a more favourable safety profile. More research on this comparison does not seem warranted. Moderate-quality evidence shows a balloon catheter may be slightly less effective as oral misoprostol, but it remains unclear if there is a difference in safety outcomes for the neonate. When compared to low-dose vaginal misoprostol, low-quality evidence shows a balloon may be less effective, but probably has a better safety profile. Future research could be focused more on safety aspects for the neonate and maternal satisfaction.
Topics: Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Cesarean Section; Dinoprostone; Labor, Induced; Misoprostol; Oxytocin; Perinatal Death
PubMed: 36996264
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001233.pub4 -
Midwifery Jun 2023Pregnancy following perinatal loss has a profound effect on parents and may contribute to intense psychological distress including grief, post-traumatic stress disorder,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Pregnancy following perinatal loss has a profound effect on parents and may contribute to intense psychological distress including grief, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety and depression. The subsequent pregnancy may also be perceived as more stressful due to the fear of recurrent loss. Midwives and other health care professionals need to be sensitive and empathetic to the needs of these parents when providing care in a pregnancy subsequent to a loss.
METHODOLOGY
The aim of this integrated literature review was to explore parents' experiences of pregnancy following a previous perinatal loss using a systematic approach. This is presented in a five-stage process that includes problem identification, literature search, data extraction and evaluation, data analysis and presentation of results. A systematic search of seven electronic databases was conducted (Jan 2009 -Jan 2023) to identify relevant primary research which addressed parents' experiences of pregnancy following a previous perinatal loss. Seven papers met the eligibility criteria and were assessed for quality using Crowe's Critical Appraisal Tool (CCAT). Thematic analysis identified two themes.
FINDINGS
The key themes identified from the literature were; the psychosocial needs and challenges faced by previously bereaved parents in subsequent pregnancies; and the need for specialist care and support in a subsequent pregnancy. Psychological needs and challenges included continued grief, depression, anxiety, and disparities in the grief process between men and women. The importance of specialist care with an increased level of support from competent, confident and compassionate health care providers was highlighted.
CONCLUSION
The experience of pregnancy following a perinatal loss can be a complex emotional experience for parents. The review identifies the need for post pregnancy loss debriefing and counselling and care pathways specific to caring for women and their partners in a pregnancy subsequent to a perinatal loss. Care in pregnancy subsequent to loss should be provided by empathetic, competent health care providers and include additional antenatal clinic appointments, pregnancy monitoring and psychological support in order to meet the needs of these expectant parents.
Topics: Male; Humans; Female; Pregnancy; Grief; Parents; Abortion, Spontaneous; Emotions; Anxiety; Stillbirth; Perinatal Death
PubMed: 37037073
DOI: 10.1016/j.midw.2023.103673 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2020Stillbirth is generally defined as a death prior to birth at or after 22 weeks' gestation. It remains a major public health concern globally. Antenatal interventions may... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Stillbirth is generally defined as a death prior to birth at or after 22 weeks' gestation. It remains a major public health concern globally. Antenatal interventions may reduce stillbirths and improve maternal and neonatal outcomes in settings with high rates of stillbirth. There are several key antenatal strategies that aim to prevent stillbirth including nutrition, and prevention and management of infections.
OBJECTIVES
To summarise the evidence from Cochrane systematic reviews on the effects of antenatal interventions for preventing stillbirth for low risk or unselected populations of women.
METHODS
We collaborated with Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Information Specialist to identify all their published reviews that specified or reported stillbirth; and we searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (search date: 29 Feburary 2020) to identify reviews published within other Cochrane groups. The primary outcome measure was stillbirth but in the absence of stillbirth data, we used perinatal mortality (both stillbirth and death in the first week of life), fetal loss or fetal death as outcomes. Two review authors independently evaluated reviews for inclusion, extracted data and assessed quality of evidence using AMSTAR (A Measurement Tool to Assess Reviews) and GRADE tools. We assigned interventions to categories with graphic icons to classify the effectiveness of interventions as: clear evidence of benefit or harm; clear evidence of no effect or equivalence; possible benefit or harm; or unknown benefit or harm or no effect or equivalence.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 43 Cochrane Reviews that included interventions in pregnant women with the potential for preventing stillbirth; all of the included reviews reported our primary outcome 'stillbirth' or in the absence of stillbirth, 'perinatal death' or 'fetal loss/fetal death'. AMSTAR quality was high in 40 reviews with scores ranging from 8 to 11 and moderate in three reviews with a score of 7. Nutrition interventions Clear evidence of benefit: balanced energy/protein supplementation versus no supplementation suggests a probable reduction in stillbirth (risk ratio (RR) 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39 to 0.94, 5 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), 3408 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Clear evidence of no effect or equivalence for stillbirth or perinatal death: vitamin A alone versus placebo or no treatment; and multiple micronutrients with iron and folic acid versus iron with or without folic acid. Unknown benefit or harm or no effect or equivalence: for all other nutrition interventions examined the effects were uncertain. Prevention and management of infections Possible benefit for fetal loss or death: insecticide-treated anti-malarial nets versus no nets (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.97, 4 RCTs; low-certainty). Unknown evidence of no effect or equivalence: drugs for preventing malaria (stillbirth RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.36, 5 RCTs, 7130 women, moderate certainty in women of all parity; perinatal death RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.63, 4 RCTs, 5216 women, moderate-certainty in women of all parity). Prevention, detection and management of other morbidities Clear evidence of benefit: the following interventions suggest a reduction: midwife-led models of care in settings where the midwife is the primary healthcare provider particularly for low-risk pregnant women (overall fetal loss/neonatal death reduction RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.99, 13 RCTs, 17,561 women; high-certainty), training versus not training traditional birth attendants in rural populations of low- and middle-income countries (stillbirth reduction odds ratio (OR) 0.69, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.83, 1 RCT, 18,699 women, moderate-certainty; perinatal death reduction OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.83, 1 RCT, 18,699 women, moderate-certainty). Clear evidence of harm: a reduced number of antenatal care visits probably results in an increase in perinatal death (RR 1.14 95% CI 1.00 to 1.31, 5 RCTs, 56,431 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Clear evidence of no effect or equivalence: there was evidence of no effect in the risk of stillbirth/fetal loss or perinatal death for the following interventions and comparisons: psychosocial interventions; and providing case notes to women. Possible benefit: community-based intervention packages (including community support groups/women's groups, community mobilisation and home visitation, or training traditional birth attendants who made home visits) may result in a reduction of stillbirth (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.91, 15 RCTs, 201,181 women; low-certainty) and perinatal death (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.86, 17 RCTs, 282,327 women; low-certainty). Unknown benefit or harm or no effect or equivalence: the effects were uncertain for other interventions examined. Screening and management of fetal growth and well-being Clear evidence of benefit: computerised antenatal cardiotocography for assessing infant's well-being in utero compared with traditional antenatal cardiotocography (perinatal mortality reduction RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.88, 2 RCTs, 469 women; moderate-certainty). Unknown benefit or harm or no effect or equivalence: the effects were uncertain for other interventions examined.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
While most interventions were unable to demonstrate a clear effect in reducing stillbirth or perinatal death, several interventions suggested a clear benefit, such as balanced energy/protein supplements, midwife-led models of care, training versus not training traditional birth attendants, and antenatal cardiotocography. Possible benefits were also observed for insecticide-treated anti-malarial nets and community-based intervention packages, whereas a reduced number of antenatal care visits were shown to be harmful. However, there was variation in the effectiveness of interventions across different settings, indicating the need to carefully understand the context in which these interventions were tested. Further high-quality RCTs are needed to evaluate the effects of antenatal preventive interventions and which approaches are most effective to reduce the risk of stillbirth. Stillbirth (or fetal death), perinatal and neonatal death need to be reported separately in future RCTs of antenatal interventions to allow assessment of different interventions on these rare but important outcomes and they need to clearly define the target populations of women where the intervention is most likely to be of benefit. As the high burden of stillbirths occurs in low- and middle-income countries, further high-quality trials need to be conducted in these settings as a priority.
Topics: Cardiotocography; Female; Fetal Death; Fetal Development; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Insecticide-Treated Bednets; Midwifery; Nutrition Assessment; Perinatal Death; Pregnancy; Prenatal Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stillbirth; Systematic Reviews as Topic
PubMed: 33336827
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009599.pub2 -
Nature Medicine Jan 2023Pregnancy loss and perinatal death are devastating events for families. We assessed 'genomic autopsy' as an adjunct to standard autopsy for 200 families who had...
Pregnancy loss and perinatal death are devastating events for families. We assessed 'genomic autopsy' as an adjunct to standard autopsy for 200 families who had experienced fetal or newborn death, providing a definitive or candidate genetic diagnosis in 105 families. Our cohort provides evidence of severe atypical in utero presentations of known genetic disorders and identifies novel phenotypes and disease genes. Inheritance of 42% of definitive diagnoses were either autosomal recessive (30.8%), X-linked recessive (3.8%) or autosomal dominant (excluding de novos, 7.7%), with risk of recurrence in future pregnancies. We report that at least ten families (5%) used their diagnosis for preimplantation (5) or prenatal diagnosis (5) of 12 pregnancies. We emphasize the clinical importance of genomic investigations of pregnancy loss and perinatal death, with short turnaround times for diagnostic reporting and followed by systematic research follow-up investigations. This approach has the potential to enable accurate counseling for future pregnancies.
Topics: Pregnancy; Humans; Female; Perinatal Death; Autopsy; Abortion, Spontaneous; Prenatal Diagnosis; Genomics
PubMed: 36658419
DOI: 10.1038/s41591-022-02142-1 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2020Risks of stillbirth or neonatal death increase as gestation continues beyond term (around 40 weeks' gestation). It is unclear whether a policy of labour induction can... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Risks of stillbirth or neonatal death increase as gestation continues beyond term (around 40 weeks' gestation). It is unclear whether a policy of labour induction can reduce these risks. This Cochrane Review is an update of a review that was originally published in 2006 and subsequently updated in 2012 and 2018.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of a policy of labour induction at or beyond 37 weeks' gestation compared with a policy of awaiting spontaneous labour indefinitely (or until a later gestational age, or until a maternal or fetal indication for induction of labour arises) on pregnancy outcomes for the infant and the mother.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (17 July 2019), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in pregnant women at or beyond 37 weeks, comparing a policy of labour induction with a policy of awaiting spontaneous onset of labour (expectant management). We also included trials published in abstract form only. Cluster-RCTs, quasi-RCTs and trials using a cross-over design were not eligible for inclusion in this review. We included pregnant women at or beyond 37 weeks' gestation. Since risk factors at this stage of pregnancy would normally require intervention, only trials including women at low risk for complications, as defined by trialists, were eligible. The trials of induction of labour in women with prelabour rupture of membranes at or beyond term were not considered in this review but are considered in a separate Cochrane Review.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. Data were checked for accuracy. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
In this updated review, we included 34 RCTs (reporting on over 21,000 women and infants) mostly conducted in high-income settings. The trials compared a policy to induce labour usually after 41 completed weeks of gestation (> 287 days) with waiting for labour to start and/or waiting for a period before inducing labour. The trials were generally at low to moderate risk of bias. Compared with a policy of expectant management, a policy of labour induction was associated with fewer (all-cause) perinatal deaths (risk ratio (RR) 0.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 0.64; 22 trials, 18,795 infants; high-certainty evidence). There were four perinatal deaths in the labour induction policy group compared with 25 perinatal deaths in the expectant management group. The number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) with induction of labour, in order to prevent one perinatal death, was 544 (95% CI 441 to 1042). There were also fewer stillbirths in the induction group (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.75; 22 trials, 18,795 infants; high-certainty evidence); two in the induction policy group and 16 in the expectant management group. For women in the policy of induction arms of trials, there were probably fewer caesarean sections compared with expectant management (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.95; 31 trials, 21,030 women; moderate-certainty evidence); and probably little or no difference in operative vaginal births with induction (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.10; 22 trials, 18,584 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Induction may make little or difference to perineal trauma (severe perineal tear: RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.26; 5 trials; 11,589 women; low-certainty evidence). Induction probably makes little or no difference to postpartum haemorrhage (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.15, 9 trials; 12,609 women; moderate-certainty evidence), or breastfeeding at discharge (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.04; 2 trials, 7487 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Very low certainty evidence means that we are uncertain about the effect of induction or expectant management on the length of maternal hospital stay (average mean difference (MD) -0.19 days, 95% CI -0.56 to 0.18; 7 trials; 4120 women; Tau² = 0.20; I² = 94%). Rates of neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission were lower (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.96; 17 trials, 17,826 infants; high-certainty evidence), and probably fewer babies had Apgar scores less than seven at five minutes in the induction groups compared with expectant management (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.96; 20 trials, 18,345 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). Induction or expectant management may make little or no difference for neonatal encephalopathy (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.31; 2 trials, 8851 infants; low-certainty evidence, and probably makes little or no difference for neonatal trauma (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.49; 5 trials, 13,106 infants; moderate-certainty evidence) for induction compared with expectant management. Neurodevelopment at childhood follow-up and postnatal depression were not reported by any trials. In subgroup analyses, no differences were seen for timing of induction (< 40 versus 40-41 versus > 41 weeks' gestation), by parity (primiparous versus multiparous) or state of cervix for any of the main outcomes (perinatal death, stillbirth, NICU admission, caesarean section, operative vaginal birth, or perineal trauma).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is a clear reduction in perinatal death with a policy of labour induction at or beyond 37 weeks compared with expectant management, though absolute rates are small (0.4 versus 3 deaths per 1000). There were also lower caesarean rates without increasing rates of operative vaginal births and there were fewer NICU admissions with a policy of induction. Most of the important outcomes assessed using GRADE had high- or moderate-certainty ratings. While existing trials have not yet reported on childhood neurodevelopment, this is an important area for future research. The optimal timing of offering induction of labour to women at or beyond 37 weeks' gestation needs further investigation, as does further exploration of risk profiles of women and their values and preferences. Offering women tailored counselling may help them make an informed choice between induction of labour for pregnancies, particularly those continuing beyond 41 weeks - or waiting for labour to start and/or waiting before inducing labour.
Topics: Cesarean Section; Female; Gestational Age; Humans; Infant; Infant Mortality; Infant, Newborn; Intensive Care Units, Neonatal; Labor, Induced; Perinatal Death; Pregnancy; Pregnancy, Prolonged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk; Stillbirth; Watchful Waiting
PubMed: 32666584
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004945.pub5