Self-exclusion from health care in women at high risk for postpartum depression

Background A significant proportion of women who are vulnerable to postnatal depression refuse to engage in treatment programmes. Little is known about them, other than some general demographic characteristics. In particular, their access to health care and their own and their infants' health outcomes are uncharted. Methods We conducted a nested cohort case-control study, using data from computerized health systems, and general practitioner (GP) and maternity records, to identify the characteristics, health service contacts, and maternal and infant health outcomes for primiparous antenatal clinic attenders at high risk for postnatal depression who either refused (self-exclusion group) or else agreed (take-up group) to receive additional Health Visiting support in pregnancy and the first 2 months postpartum. Results Women excluding themselves from Health Visitor support were younger and less highly educated than women willing to take up the support. They were less likely to attend midwifery, GP and routine Health Visitor appointments, but were more likely to book in late and to attend accident and emergency department (A&E). Their infants had poorer outcome in terms of gestation, birthweight and breastfeeding. Differences between the groups still obtained when age and education were taken into account for midwifery contacts, A&E attendance and gestation;the difference in the initiation of breast feeding was attenuated, but not wholly explained, by age and education. Conclusion A subgroup of psychologically vulnerable childbearing women are at particular risk for poor access to health care and adverse infant outcome. Barriers to take-up of services need to be understood in order better to deliver care.

Antenatal corticosteroid use and clinical evolution of preterm newborn infants

Objectives: To describe the use of antenatal corticosteroid and clinical evolution of preterm babies. Methods: An observational prospective cohort study was carried out. All 463 pregnant women and their 514 newborn babies with gestational age ranging from 23 to 34 weeks, born at the Brazilian Neonatal Research Network units, were evaluated from August 1 to December 31, 2001. The data were obtained through maternal interview, analysis of medical records, and follow-up of the newborn infants. Data analysis was performed with the use of chi-square, t Student, Mann-Whitney, and ANOVA tests and multiple logistic regression, with level of significance set at 5%. Results: Treatment was directly associated with the number of prenatal visits, with maternal hypertension and with the antenatal use of tocolytic agents. Babies from treated pregnant women presented better Apgar scores at the 1st and 5th minute, reduced need for intervention in the delivery room and lower SNAPPE II. They were born with higher birth weight, longer gestational age and needed less surfactant use, ventilation, and oxygenation time. After multiple logistic regression, the use of antenatal corticosteroid independently improved birth conditions, decreased ventilation time, being related to increased occurrence of neonatal sepsis. Conclusions: The use of corticosteroid was associated with better prenatal care and birth conditions, better preterm evolution but higher risk of infection. Copyright © 2004 by Sociedade Brasileira de Pediatria.

Uso antenatal de corticosteóide e evolução clínica de recém-nascidos pré-termo

Objectives: To describe the use of antenatal corticosteroid and clinical evolution of preterm babies. Methods: An observational prospective cohort study was carried out. All 463 pregnant women and their 514 newborn babies with gestational age ranging from 23 to 34 weeks, born at the Brazilian Neonatal Research Network units, were evaluated from August 1 to December 31, 2001. The data were obtained through maternal interview, analysis of medical records, and follow-up of the newborn infants. Data analysis was performed with the use of chi-square, t Student, Mann-Whitney, and ANOVA tests and multiple logistic regression, with level of significance set at 5%. Results: Treatment was directly associated with the number of prenatal visits, with maternal hypertension and with the antenatal use of tocolytic agents. Babies from treated pregnant women presented better Apgar scores at the 1st and 5th minute, reduced need for intervention in the delivery room and lower SNAPPE II. They were born with higher birth weight, longer gestational age and needed less surfactant use, ventilation, and oxygenation time. After multiple logistic regression, the use of antenatal corticosteroid independently improved birth conditions, decreased ventilation time, being related to increased occurrence of neonatal sepsis. Conclusions: The use of corticosteroid was associated with better prenatal care and birth conditions, better preterm evolution but higher risk of infection. © 2007 Sociedad Chilena de Pediatría.

Risk factors for perinatal death in two different levels of care: a case-control study

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)

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...

Intensive care for extreme prematurity--moving beyond gestational age.

BACKGROUND: Decisions regarding whether to administer intensive care to extremely premature infants are often based on gestational age alone. However, other factors also affect the prognosis for these patients. METHODS: We prospectively studied a cohort of 4446 infants born at 22 to 25 weeks' gestation (determined on the basis of the best obstetrical estimate) in the Neonatal Research Network of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development to relate risk factors assessable at or before birth to the likelihood of survival, survival without profound neurodevelopmental impairment, and survival without neurodevelopmental impairment at a corrected age of 18 to 22 months. RESULTS: Among study infants, 3702 (83%) received intensive care in the form of mechanical ventilation. Among the 4192 study infants (94%) for whom outcomes were determined at 18 to 22 months, 49% died, 61% died or had profound impairment, and 73% died or had impairment. In multivariable analyses of infants who received intensive care, exposure to antenatal corticosteroids, female sex, singleton birth, and higher birth weight (per each 100-g increment) were each associated with reductions in the risk of death and the risk of death or profound or any neurodevelopmental impairment; these reductions were similar to those associated with a 1-week increase in gestational age. At the same estimated likelihood of a favorable outcome, girls were less likely than boys to receive intensive care. The outcomes for infants who underwent ventilation were better predicted with the use of the above factors than with use of gestational age alone. CONCLUSIONS: The likelihood of a favorable outcome with intensive care can be better estimated by consideration of four factors in addition to gestational age: sex, exposure or nonexposure to antenatal corticosteroids, whether single or multiple birth, and birth weight. (ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00063063 [ClinicalTrials.gov] and NCT00009633 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Antenatal screening and its possible meaning from unborn baby's perspective

In recent decades antenatal screening has become one of the most routine procedure of pregnancy-follow up and the subject of hot debate in bioethics circles. In this paper the rationale behind doing antenatal screening and the actual and potential problems that it may cause will be discussed. The paper will examine the issue from the point of wiew of parents, health care professionals and, most importantly, the child-to-be. It will show how unthoughtfully antenatal screening is performed and how pregnancy is treated almost as a disease just since the emergence of antenatal screening. Genetic screening and ethical problems caused by the procedure will also be addressed and I will suggest that screening is more to do with the interests of others rather than those of the child-to be.

From pregnancy to palliative care: advancing professional midwifery practice?

Historically midwives may have not considered palliative care as a part of their professional role. Enhanced technologies and antenatal screening have broadened the boundaries of care. However do midwives truly embrace the philosophy of palliative care into their practice? This paper presents the discussion round a case study that demonstrates the evolving area of advanced practice: perinatal palliative care. What we highlight is that midwives in fact have an important collaborative role to play in ensuring that palliative care for the baby and family starts as soon as a life-limiting condition is recognised, thus ensuring best care and support are provided for those parents and families for whom pregnancy sadly leads to palliative care. Five key lessons for practice are outlined.