Obstetric interventions and pregnancy outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic in England: A nationwide cohort study.
Adolescent
Adult
COVID-19
/ epidemiology
Cohort Studies
Delivery, Obstetric
/ statistics & numerical data
England
/ epidemiology
Female
Humans
Infant, Newborn
Obstetric Labor Complications
/ diagnosis
Pregnancy
Pregnancy Outcome
/ epidemiology
State Medicine
/ statistics & numerical data
Young Adult
Journal
PLoS medicine
ISSN: 1549-1676
Titre abrégé: PLoS Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101231360
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2022
01 2022
Historique:
received:
24
04
2021
accepted:
07
12
2021
revised:
31
01
2022
pubmed:
11
1
2022
medline:
8
2
2022
entrez:
10
1
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted maternity services worldwide and imposed restrictions on societal behaviours. This national study aimed to compare obstetric intervention and pregnancy outcome rates in England during the pandemic and corresponding pre-pandemic calendar periods, and to assess whether differences in these rates varied according to ethnic and socioeconomic background. We conducted a national study of singleton births in English National Health Service hospitals. We compared births during the COVID-19 pandemic period (23 March 2020 to 22 February 2021) with births during the corresponding calendar period 1 year earlier. The Hospital Episode Statistics database provided administrative hospital data about maternal characteristics, obstetric inventions (induction of labour, elective or emergency cesarean section, and instrumental birth), and outcomes (stillbirth, preterm birth, small for gestational age [SGA; birthweight < 10th centile], prolonged maternal length of stay (≥3 days), and maternal 42-day readmission). Multi-level logistic regression models were used to compare intervention and outcome rates between the corresponding pre-pandemic and pandemic calendar periods and to test for interactions between pandemic period and ethnic and socioeconomic background. All models were adjusted for maternal characteristics including age, obstetric history, comorbidities, and COVID-19 status at birth. The study included 948,020 singleton births (maternal characteristics: median age 30 years, 41.6% primiparous, 8.3% with gestational diabetes, 2.4% with preeclampsia, and 1.6% with pre-existing diabetes or hypertension); 451,727 births occurred during the defined pandemic period. Maternal characteristics were similar in the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. Compared to the pre-pandemic period, stillbirth rates remained similar (0.36% pandemic versus 0.37% pre-pandemic, p = 0.16). Preterm birth and SGA birth rates were slightly lower during the pandemic (6.0% versus 6.1% for preterm births, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.96, 95% CI 0.94-0.97; 5.6% versus 5.8% for SGA births, aOR 0.95, 95% CI 0.93-0.96; both p < 0.001). Slightly higher rates of obstetric intervention were observed during the pandemic (40.4% versus 39.1% for induction of labour, aOR 1.04, 95% CI 1.03-1.05; 13.9% versus 12.9% for elective cesarean section, aOR 1.13, 95% CI 1.11-1.14; 18.4% versus 17.0% for emergency cesarean section, aOR 1.07, 95% CI 1.06-1.08; all p < 0.001). Lower rates of prolonged maternal length of stay (16.7% versus 20.2%, aOR 0.77, 95% CI 0.76-0.78, p < 0.001) and maternal readmission (3.0% versus 3.3%, aOR 0.88, 95% CI 0.86-0.90, p < 0.001) were observed during the pandemic period. There was some evidence that differences in the rates of preterm birth, emergency cesarean section, and unassisted vaginal birth varied according to the mother's ethnic background but not according to her socioeconomic background. A key limitation is that multiple comparisons were made, increasing the chance of false-positive results. In this study, we found very small decreases in preterm birth and SGA birth rates and very small increases in induction of labour and elective and emergency cesarean section during the COVID-19 pandemic, with some evidence of a slightly different pattern of results in women from ethnic minority backgrounds. These changes in obstetric intervention rates and pregnancy outcomes may be linked to women's behaviour, environmental exposure, changes in maternity practice, or reduced staffing levels.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted maternity services worldwide and imposed restrictions on societal behaviours. This national study aimed to compare obstetric intervention and pregnancy outcome rates in England during the pandemic and corresponding pre-pandemic calendar periods, and to assess whether differences in these rates varied according to ethnic and socioeconomic background.
METHODS AND FINDINGS
We conducted a national study of singleton births in English National Health Service hospitals. We compared births during the COVID-19 pandemic period (23 March 2020 to 22 February 2021) with births during the corresponding calendar period 1 year earlier. The Hospital Episode Statistics database provided administrative hospital data about maternal characteristics, obstetric inventions (induction of labour, elective or emergency cesarean section, and instrumental birth), and outcomes (stillbirth, preterm birth, small for gestational age [SGA; birthweight < 10th centile], prolonged maternal length of stay (≥3 days), and maternal 42-day readmission). Multi-level logistic regression models were used to compare intervention and outcome rates between the corresponding pre-pandemic and pandemic calendar periods and to test for interactions between pandemic period and ethnic and socioeconomic background. All models were adjusted for maternal characteristics including age, obstetric history, comorbidities, and COVID-19 status at birth. The study included 948,020 singleton births (maternal characteristics: median age 30 years, 41.6% primiparous, 8.3% with gestational diabetes, 2.4% with preeclampsia, and 1.6% with pre-existing diabetes or hypertension); 451,727 births occurred during the defined pandemic period. Maternal characteristics were similar in the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. Compared to the pre-pandemic period, stillbirth rates remained similar (0.36% pandemic versus 0.37% pre-pandemic, p = 0.16). Preterm birth and SGA birth rates were slightly lower during the pandemic (6.0% versus 6.1% for preterm births, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.96, 95% CI 0.94-0.97; 5.6% versus 5.8% for SGA births, aOR 0.95, 95% CI 0.93-0.96; both p < 0.001). Slightly higher rates of obstetric intervention were observed during the pandemic (40.4% versus 39.1% for induction of labour, aOR 1.04, 95% CI 1.03-1.05; 13.9% versus 12.9% for elective cesarean section, aOR 1.13, 95% CI 1.11-1.14; 18.4% versus 17.0% for emergency cesarean section, aOR 1.07, 95% CI 1.06-1.08; all p < 0.001). Lower rates of prolonged maternal length of stay (16.7% versus 20.2%, aOR 0.77, 95% CI 0.76-0.78, p < 0.001) and maternal readmission (3.0% versus 3.3%, aOR 0.88, 95% CI 0.86-0.90, p < 0.001) were observed during the pandemic period. There was some evidence that differences in the rates of preterm birth, emergency cesarean section, and unassisted vaginal birth varied according to the mother's ethnic background but not according to her socioeconomic background. A key limitation is that multiple comparisons were made, increasing the chance of false-positive results.
CONCLUSIONS
In this study, we found very small decreases in preterm birth and SGA birth rates and very small increases in induction of labour and elective and emergency cesarean section during the COVID-19 pandemic, with some evidence of a slightly different pattern of results in women from ethnic minority backgrounds. These changes in obstetric intervention rates and pregnancy outcomes may be linked to women's behaviour, environmental exposure, changes in maternity practice, or reduced staffing levels.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35007282
doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003884
pii: PMEDICINE-D-21-01893
pmc: PMC8803187
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e1003884Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
All authors have received support from Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership. JJ and LW are or have been members of the RCOG COVID-19 guidance cell which produces clinical guidance and policy documents to support the management of pregnant women during the pandemic in the UK. AK is PI of COVID-19 in pregnancy studies and a member of the COVAX Working Group on COVID-19 in pregnancy.
Références
Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2020 Nov;2(4):100234
pubmed: 32984804
Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2021 Sep 13;:
pubmed: 34515360
Stat Med. 2011 Feb 20;30(4):377-99
pubmed: 21225900
Lancet Glob Health. 2021 Jun;9(6):e759-e772
pubmed: 33811827
Ann Hum Biol. 2012 Sep;39(5):382-94
pubmed: 22780429
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Sep;225(3):289.e1-289.e17
pubmed: 34187688
BMJ Glob Health. 2021 Aug;6(8):
pubmed: 34385161
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2021 Jul 12;:
pubmed: 34254286
Lancet. 2021 May 8;397(10286):1711-1724
pubmed: 33939953
BMJ Open. 2021 Oct 1;11(10):e054410
pubmed: 34598993
JAMA Pediatr. 2021 Aug 1;175(8):817-826
pubmed: 33885740
JAMA. 2020 Jul 10;:
pubmed: 32648892
BMJ Open. 2019 Nov 25;9(11):e030968
pubmed: 31767585
Midwifery. 2020 Sep;88:102779
pubmed: 32600862
PLoS One. 2021 May 5;16(5):e0251123
pubmed: 33951100
BMJ Glob Health. 2020 Sep;5(9):
pubmed: 32999054
BMJ. 2011 Nov 23;343:d7400
pubmed: 22117057
Lancet Glob Health. 2020 Jul;8(7):e901-e908
pubmed: 32405459
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2021 May;153(2):315-321
pubmed: 33523481
BMJ Open. 2021 Aug 23;11(8):e051977
pubmed: 34426472
J Perinat Med. 2020 Nov 26;48(9):1008-1012
pubmed: 32845868
Anaesthesia. 2021 Mar;76(3):312-319
pubmed: 33073371
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Nov;225(5):522.e1-522.e11
pubmed: 34023315
Midwifery. 2020 Sep;88:102759
pubmed: 32485502
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Sep;207(3 Suppl):S3-8
pubmed: 22920056
BJOG. 2020 Aug;127(9):1074-1080
pubmed: 32180311
Reprod Biomed Online. 2020 Sep;41(3):428-430
pubmed: 32753362
BJOG. 2021 Apr;128(5):880-889
pubmed: 32992408
Ann Thorac Surg. 2016 May;101(5):1644-5
pubmed: 27106412
BMJ Open. 2021 Mar 15;11(3):e042753
pubmed: 33722867