Perinatal mental health service provision in Switzerland and in the UK.

QUESTIONS UNDER STUDY The epidemiology of maternal perinatal-psychiatric disorders as well as their effect on the baby is well recognised. Increasingly well researched specialised treatment methods can reduce maternal morbidity, positively affect mother-baby bonding and empower women's confidence as a mother. Here, we aimed to compare guidelines and the structure of perinatal-psychiatric service delivery in the United Kingdom and in Switzerland from the government's perspective. METHODS Swiss cantons provided information regarding guidelines and structure of service delivery in 2000. A subsequent survey using the same questionnaire was carried out in 2007. In the UK, similar information was accessed through published reports from 2000-2012. RESULTS Guidelines for perinatal psychiatry exist in the UK, whereas in Switzerland in 2000 none of the 26 cantons had guidelines, and in 2007 only one canton did. Joint mother-baby admissions on general psychiatric wards were offered by 92% of the Swiss cantons. In the UK, pregnant women and joint mother-baby admissions are only advised onto specialised perinatal-psychiatric units. In Switzerland, in 2007, three specialised units (max. 24 beds) were in place corresponding to 1 unit per 2.5 million people, while in the UK there were 22 mother-baby units (168 beds) in 2012 (1 unit per 2.8 million). In the UK, less than 50% of trusts provided specialised perinatal-psychiatric health care. CONCLUSIONS The main difference between the UK and Switzerland was the absence of guidelines, regular assessment and plans for future development of perinatal psychiatry in Switzerland. There are still geographical differences in the provision of perinatal-psychiatric services in the UK.

Perinatal care at the limit of viability between 22 and 26 completed weeks of gestation in Switzerland. 2011 revision of the Swiss recommendations

Perinatal care of pregnant women at high risk for preterm delivery and of preterm infants born at the limit of viability (22-26 completed weeks of gestation) requires a multidisciplinary approach by an experienced perinatal team. Limited precision in the determination of both gestational age and foetal weight, as well as biological variability may significantly affect the course of action chosen in individual cases. The decisions that must be taken with the pregnant women and on behalf of the preterm infant in this context are complex and have far-reaching consequences. When counselling pregnant women and their partners, neonatologists and obstetricians should provide them with comprehensive information in a sensitive and supportive way to build a basis of trust. The decisions are developed in a continuing dialogue between all parties involved (physicians, midwives, nursing staff and parents) with the principal aim to find solutions that are in the infant's and pregnant woman's best interest. Knowledge of current gestational age-specific mortality and morbidity rates and how they are modified by prenatally known prognostic factors (estimated foetal weight, sex, exposure or nonexposure to antenatal corticosteroids, single or multiple births) as well as the application of accepted ethical principles form the basis for responsible decision-making. Communication between all parties involved plays a central role. The members of the interdisciplinary working group suggest that the care of preterm infants with a gestational age between 22 0/7 and 23 6/7 weeks should generally be limited to palliative care. Obstetric interventions for foetal indications such as Caesarean section delivery are usually not indicated. In selected cases, for example, after 23 weeks of pregnancy have been completed and several of the above mentioned prenatally known prognostic factors are favourable or well informed parents insist on the initiation of life-sustaining therapies, active obstetric interventions for foetal indications and provisional intensive care of the neonate may be reasonable. In preterm infants with a gestational age between 24 0/7 and 24 6/7 weeks, it can be difficult to determine whether the burden of obstetric interventions and neonatal intensive care is justified given the limited chances of success of such a therapy. In such cases, the individual constellation of prenatally known factors which impact on prognosis can be helpful in the decision making process with the parents. In preterm infants with a gestational age between 25 0/7 and 25 6/7 weeks, foetal surveillance, obstetric interventions for foetal indications and neonatal intensive care measures are generally indicated. However, if several prenatally known prognostic factors are unfavourable and the parents agree, primary non-intervention and neonatal palliative care can be considered. All pregnant women with threatening preterm delivery or premature rupture of membranes at the limit of viability must be transferred to a perinatal centre with a level III neonatal intensive care unit no later than 23 0/7 weeks of gestation, unless emergency delivery is indicated. An experienced neonatology team should be involved in all deliveries that take place after 23 0/7 weeks of gestation to help to decide together with the parents if the initiation of intensive care measures appears to be appropriate or if preference should be given to palliative care (i.e., primary non-intervention). In doubtful situations, it can be reasonable to initiate intensive care and to admit the preterm infant to a neonatal intensive care unit (i.e., provisional intensive care). The infant's clinical evolution and additional discussions with the parents will help to clarify whether the life-sustaining therapies should be continued or withdrawn. Life support is continued as long as there is reasonable hope for survival and the infant's burden of intensive care is acceptable. If, on the other hand, the health car...

Cloning of farm animals: impact on animal health and welfare and implications in trade

The commercial use of animal cloning for breeding food producing animals has been limited so far by biological and technical constraints such as adverse effects on the health and welfare of animals, especially high perinatal and postnatal disease and mortality of clones. However, the improvement of the technique may overcome those problems in future and contribute to the spread of cloning in agricultural production, which raises concern not only on health and welfare aspects but also on food safety and ethics. This may cause conflict in international trade. The present article reviews these topics on the basis of up-to-date scientific opinions.

Pregnancy and birth cohort resources in europe: a large opportunity for aetiological child health research

BACKGROUND During the past 25 years, many pregnancy and birth cohorts have been established. Each cohort provides unique opportunities for examining associations of early-life exposures with child development and health. However, to fully exploit the large amount of available resources and to facilitate cross-cohort collaboration, it is necessary to have accessible information on each cohort and its individual characteristics. The aim of this work was to provide an overview of European pregnancy and birth cohorts registered in a freely accessible database located at http://www.birthcohorts.net. METHODS European pregnancy and birth cohorts initiated in 1980 or later with at least 300 mother-child pairs enrolled during pregnancy or at birth, and with postnatal data, were eligible for inclusion. Eligible cohorts were invited to provide information on the data and biological samples collected, as well as the timing of data collection. RESULTS In total, 70 cohorts were identified. Of these, 56 fulfilled the inclusion criteria encompassing a total of more than 500,000 live-born European children. The cohorts represented 19 countries with the majority of cohorts located in Northern and Western Europe. Some cohorts were general with multiple aims, whilst others focused on specific health or exposure-related research questions. CONCLUSION This work demonstrates a great potential for cross-cohort collaboration addressing important aspects of child health. The web site, http://www.birthcohorts.net, proved to be a useful tool for accessing information on European pregnancy and birth cohorts and their characteristics.

Successful transnasal delivery of stem cells in a rat model of perinatal hypoxic-ischemic brain injury

OBJECTIVE: New routes for cell transplantation into the brain need to be explored as intracerebral or intrathecal applications have a high risk to cause damage to the central nervous system. It has been hypothesized that transnasally administrated cells bypass the blood-brain barrier and migrate along the olfactory neural route into the brain and cerebrospinal fluid. Our goal is to confirm this hypothesis by transnasally administrating Wharton’s Jelly mesenchymal stem cells (WJ-MSC) and neural progenitor cells (NPC) to perinatal rats in a model of hypoxic-ischemic brain injury. STUDY DESIGN: Four-day-old Wistar rat pups, previously brain-damaged by combined hypoxic-ischemic and inflammatory insult, either received WJ-MSC or green fluorescent protein-expressing NPC: The heads of the rat pups were immobilized and 3 ml drops containing the cells (50’000 cells/ml) were placed on one nostril allowing it to be snorted. This procedure was repeated twice, alternating right to left nostril with an interval of one minute between administrations. The rat pups received a total of 600’000 cells. Animals were sacrificed 24h, 48h or 7 days after the application of the cells. Fixed brains were collected, embedded in paraffin and sectioned. RESULTS: Transplanted cells were found in the layers of the olfactory bulb (OB), the cerebral cortex, thalamus and the hippocampus. The amount of cells was highest in the OB. Animals treated with transnasally delivered stem cells showed significantly decreased gliosis compared to untreated animals. CONCLUSION: Our data show that transnasal delivery of WJ-MSC and NPC to the newborn brain after perinatal brain damage is successful. The cells not only migrate the brain, but also decrease scar formation and improve neurogenesis. Therefore, the non-invasive intranasal delivery of stem cells to the brain may be the preferred method for stem cell treatment of perinatal brain damage and should be preferred in future clinical trials.