Sara Kenyon1, Peter Brocklehurst, Ann Blackburn, David J Taylor. 1. Reproductive Sciences Section, Clinical Division of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Leicester, Robert Kilpatrick Building, Leicester Royal Infirmary, PO Box 65, Leicester LE2 7LX, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there has been any change in UK policy for the screening and intrapartum management of Group B Streptococcus in pregnancy over a two year period. DESIGN: Two national survey's of practice carried out in 1999 and 2001. SETTING: All obstetric units in the UK. POPULATION: Clinical directors of maternity services. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to all clinical directors of maternity services in the UK requesting information about their policy and practice with respect to antenatal screening for Group B Streptococcus colonisation. Reminders were sent after one month. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number of maternity units in the UK screening and offering intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis for Group B Streptococcus colonisation in pregnancy. RESULTS: The response rates were 84% in 1999 and 82% in 2001. Of the responding units, six (3%) in 1999 and four (2%) in 2001 used vaginal swab based screening for Group B Streptococcus colonisation in the antenatal period. In 1999, intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis was offered to women with a previous baby affected by Group B Streptococcus in 85% (176/207) of maternity units and in 2001 this had risen to 95% (193/203). Similarly, in 1999 intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis was offered to women who were known carriers of Group B Streptococcus in 87% (179/207) of maternity units and in 2001 this had risen to 95% (193/203). Appropriate dosage of a recommended antibiotic was prescribed in 7% (9/123) units in 1999 and in 20% (35/178) units in 2001. CONCLUSIONS: Although intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis for women at high risk of giving birth to babies with Group B Streptococcus is widely practiced in the UK, a programme of antenatal screening for Group B Streptococcus colonisation has not been adopted along the lines advocated in the USA. There therefore remains an opportunity to evaluate such a screening programme in a randomised trial.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there has been any change in UK policy for the screening and intrapartum management of Group B Streptococcus in pregnancy over a two year period. DESIGN: Two national survey's of practice carried out in 1999 and 2001. SETTING: All obstetric units in the UK. POPULATION: Clinical directors of maternity services. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to all clinical directors of maternity services in the UK requesting information about their policy and practice with respect to antenatal screening for Group B Streptococcus colonisation. Reminders were sent after one month. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number of maternity units in the UK screening and offering intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis for Group B Streptococcus colonisation in pregnancy. RESULTS: The response rates were 84% in 1999 and 82% in 2001. Of the responding units, six (3%) in 1999 and four (2%) in 2001 used vaginal swab based screening for Group B Streptococcus colonisation in the antenatal period. In 1999, intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis was offered to women with a previous baby affected by Group B Streptococcus in 85% (176/207) of maternity units and in 2001 this had risen to 95% (193/203). Similarly, in 1999 intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis was offered to women who were known carriers of Group B Streptococcus in 87% (179/207) of maternity units and in 2001 this had risen to 95% (193/203). Appropriate dosage of a recommended antibiotic was prescribed in 7% (9/123) units in 1999 and in 20% (35/178) units in 2001. CONCLUSIONS: Although intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis for women at high risk of giving birth to babies with Group B Streptococcus is widely practiced in the UK, a programme of antenatal screening for Group B Streptococcus colonisation has not been adopted along the lines advocated in the USA. There therefore remains an opportunity to evaluate such a screening programme in a randomised trial.
Authors: M Trijbels-Smeulders; G A de Jonge; P C M Pasker-de Jong; L J Gerards; A H Adriaanse; R A van Lingen; L A A Kollée Journal: Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed Date: 2007-01-16 Impact factor: 5.747
Authors: S J McCall; K J Bunch; P Brocklehurst; R D'Arcy; K Hinshaw; J J Kurinczuk; D N Lucas; B Stenson; D J Tuffnell; M Knight Journal: BJOG Date: 2018-01-03 Impact factor: 6.531