Literature DB >> 33978727

Perinatal Outcomes During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Ontario, Canada.

Andrea N Simpson1,2,3, John W Snelgrove4, Rinku Sutradhar3,5, Karl Everett3, Ning Liu3,6, Nancy N Baxter2,3,7,8.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33978727      PMCID: PMC8116980          DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.10104

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Netw Open        ISSN: 2574-3805


× No keyword cloud information.

Introduction

Public health measures to control the COVID-19 pandemic may be associated with reduced risk of preterm birth (PTB).[1,2] Conversely, avoidance of health care may be associated with increased risk of stillbirth.[3] We evaluated rates of PTB and stillbirth during the first 6 months of the pandemic because previous studies conducted early in the pandemic have had inconsistent results.

Methods

We performed a population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada, using linked databases at ICES (formerly Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences).[4] Data use without consent is authorized under section 45 of Ontario’s Personal Health Information Protection Act; thus, review by a research ethics board was not required. We followed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) reporting in epidemiology guideline.[5] In-hospital births at 20 weeks’ or more gestational age (GA) from March 15 to September 30, 2020 (pandemic group), were compared with corresponding calendar periods from 2015 to 2019 (historical group) (eFigure in the Supplement). Births were identified in the Mother-Baby Data Set derived from the Canadian Institute for Health Information Discharge Abstract Database. Maternal characteristics included age, parity, singleton vs multiple gestation, area-level income quintile, comorbidities, pregnancy conceived with assisted reproductive technology, and SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy. PTB (live birth at <37 weeks’ GA) and stillbirths (intrauterine death at ≥20 weeks’ GA) were the primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes were extreme PTB (<28 weeks’ GA), very PTB (<32 weeks’ GA), severe small for GA (birth weight less than the fifth percentile for sex and GA), neonatal intensive care unit admission, and early (up to 7 days) and late (8-28 days) neonatal death. We used univariable and multivariable logistic regression models to examine the association between birth period (pandemic vs historical) and odds of each outcome. A generalized estimating equations approach was used to account for clustering at the level of birth institution. We assessed the effect of time spent in the pandemic by incorporating an interaction term between our exposure (pandemic vs historical birth) and number of weeks since March 15, 2020, for each PTB outcome. Analyses were performed using SAS Enterprise Guide statistical software version 7.15 (SAS Institute). Statistical tests were 2-sided, with α < .05 considered significant. Data analysis was performed from March 15 to September 30, 2020.

Results

A total of 67 747 births occurred during the pandemic period, and 348 633 births occurred during the historical period. There were no differences in baseline characteristics between groups. There was no difference in the proportion of PTBs (5103 [7.5%] vs 26 216 [7.5%] PTBs) or stillbirths (347 [0.5%] vs 1799 [0.5%] stillbirths) between the pandemic and historical groups. After multivariable analysis, the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for PTB was 1.00 (95% CI, 0.97-1.03), and that for stillbirth was 0.99 (95% CI, 0.89-1.11) (Table). We observed a small but significant difference in very PTB (<32 weeks’ GA) in the 2 groups (4531 [1.3%] vs 807 [1.2%] very PTBs; OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.80-0.99), which persisted after multivariable adjustment (aOR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.85-0.98). There were no differences in extreme PTB, severe small for GA, neonatal intensive care unit admission, or neonatal death. We found no significant association between time spent in the pandemic and any outcome.
Table.

Multivariable Generalized Estimating Equation Logistic Regression Analyses to Determine the Odds of Adverse Perinatal Outcomes During the Pandemic Period Compared With the Historical Period

OutcomeBirths, No. (%)OR (95% CI)
Pandemic group (n = 67 747)Historical group (n = 348 633)UnadjustedAdjusteda
Preterm birth (<37 wk GA)5103 (7.5)26 216 (7.5)1.00 (0.95-1.04)0.99 (0.97-1.03)
Stillbirth347 (0.5)1799 (0.5)0.99 (0.89-1.11)0.99 (0.89-1.11)
Extreme preterm birth (<28 wk GA)406 (0.6)2254 (0.6)0.90 (0.78-1.04)0.91 (0.80-1.03)
Very preterm birth (<32 wk GA)807 (1.2)4531 (1.3)0.89 (0.80-0.99)b0.91 (0.85-0.98)b
Severe small for GA3826 (5.6)19 225 (5.5)1.02 (0.98-1.07)1.02 (0.98-1.08)
Neonatal intensive care unit admission8526 (12.6)43 049 (12.3)1.01 (0.93-1.10)1.01 (0.94-1.08)
Neonatal death
Early83 (0.1)539 (0.2)0.75 (0.50-1.14)0.77 (0.51-1.15)
Late30 (0.0)165 (0.0)0.91 (0.52-1.60)0.96 (0.61-1.51)

Abbreviations: GA, gestational age; OR, odds ratio.

Adjusted analysis included the following variables: maternal age at index birth (continuous), parity (number of births ≥20 weeks’ GA, continuous), singleton vs multiple birth (binary), Aggregated Diagnosis Groups score (continuous), income quintile (categorical, with 1 as the lowest and 5 as the highest), rural residence (binary, urban vs rural), preexisting hypertension (binary), preexisting diabetes (binary), pregnancy conceived with assisted reproductive technology (binary), short interbirth interval (<18 months, binary), and history of preterm birth (binary).

Denotes significance. Observations with missing variables were excluded from the model.

Abbreviations: GA, gestational age; OR, odds ratio. Adjusted analysis included the following variables: maternal age at index birth (continuous), parity (number of births ≥20 weeks’ GA, continuous), singleton vs multiple birth (binary), Aggregated Diagnosis Groups score (continuous), income quintile (categorical, with 1 as the lowest and 5 as the highest), rural residence (binary, urban vs rural), preexisting hypertension (binary), preexisting diabetes (binary), pregnancy conceived with assisted reproductive technology (binary), short interbirth interval (<18 months, binary), and history of preterm birth (binary). Denotes significance. Observations with missing variables were excluded from the model.

Discussion

We found no differences in the overall risk of PTB, stillbirth, or other perinatal outcomes during the first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. We observed a small reduction in PTB at less than 32 weeks’ GA, similar to Denmark and Ireland, where comparable strict lockdown measures were in effect.[1,2] In contrast, no difference in PTB was observed in a population-based study in Sweden, where strict lockdown orders were not in effect.[6] Limitations of this study include the inability to evaluate out-of-hospital births; however, less than 3% of births in Ontario occur outside of hospitals. We could not evaluate for some factors that influence PTB risk, such as smoking. We did not evaluate the risk of PTB among women who experienced COVID-19 during pregnancy because this number was small. The COVID-19 pandemic first wave did not coincide with significant changes in overall PTB or stillbirth in Ontario. A small reduction in PTB at less than 32 weeks’ GA suggests that strict lockdown measures may have been associated with reduced risk in this subgroup.
  6 in total

1.  STROBE--a checklist to Strengthen the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology.

Authors:  Andre Knottnerus; Peter Tugwell
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 6.437

2.  Validation of perinatal data in the Discharge Abstract Database of the Canadian Institute for Health Information.

Authors:  K S Joseph; J Fahey
Journal:  Chronic Dis Can       Date:  2009

3.  Change in the Incidence of Stillbirth and Preterm Delivery During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Authors:  Asma Khalil; Peter von Dadelszen; Tim Draycott; Austin Ugwumadu; Pat O'Brien; Laura Magee
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2020-07-10       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Preterm Birth and Stillbirth During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Sweden: A Nationwide Cohort Study.

Authors:  Björn Pasternak; Martin Neovius; Jonas Söderling; Mia Ahlberg; Mikael Norman; Jonas F Ludvigsson; Olof Stephansson
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2021-01-12       Impact factor: 25.391

5.  Danish premature birth rates during the COVID-19 lockdown.

Authors:  Gitte Hedermann; Paula Louise Hedley; Michael Christiansen; Ulrik Lausten-Thomsen; Marie Bækvad-Hansen; Henrik Hjalgrim; Klaus Rostgaard; Porntiva Poorisrisak; Morten Breindahl; Mads Melbye; David M Hougaard
Journal:  Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed       Date:  2020-08-11       Impact factor: 5.747

6.  Unprecedented reduction in births of very low birthweight (VLBW) and extremely low birthweight (ELBW) infants during the COVID-19 lockdown in Ireland: a 'natural experiment' allowing analysis of data from the prior two decades.

Authors:  Roy K Philip; Helen Purtill; Elizabeth Reidy; Mandy Daly; Mendinaro Imcha; Deirdre McGrath; Nuala H O'Connell; Colum P Dunne
Journal:  BMJ Glob Health       Date:  2020-09
  6 in total
  7 in total

Review 1.  The impact of mitigation measures on perinatal outcomes during the first nine months of the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review with meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sarah Hawco; Daniel L Rolnik; Andrea Woolner; Natalie J Cameron; Victoria Wyness; Ben W Mol; Mairead Black
Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol       Date:  2022-05-14       Impact factor: 2.831

2.  Outcomes of infants with hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy during COVID-19 pandemic lockdown in Canada: a cohort study.

Authors:  Sujith Kumar Reddy Gurram Venkata; Prakesh S Shah; Marc Beltempo; Eugene Yoon; Stephen Wood; Matthew Hicks; Thierry Daboval; Jonathan Wong; Pia Wintermark; Khorshid Mohammad
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2022-06-08       Impact factor: 1.532

3.  COVID-19 pandemic and population-level pregnancy and neonatal outcomes: a living systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jie Yang; Rohan D'Souza; Ashraf Kharrat; Deshayne B Fell; John W Snelgrove; Kellie E Murphy; Prakesh S Shah
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand       Date:  2021-06-28       Impact factor: 4.544

4.  Coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in general population: A living systematic review and meta-analysis (updated Aug 14, 2021).

Authors:  Jie Yang; Rohan D'Souza; Ashraf Kharrat; Deshayne B Fell; John W Snelgrove; Kellie E Murphy; Prakesh S Shah
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand       Date:  2021-11-03       Impact factor: 4.544

Review 5.  Coronavirus Disease 2019 Infection in Newborns.

Authors:  Jeffrey M Perlman; Christine Salvatore
Journal:  Clin Perinatol       Date:  2021-11-09       Impact factor: 3.430

6.  COVID-19 Infection in Pregnancy: Obstetrical Risk Factors and Neonatal Outcomes-A Monocentric, Single-Cohort Study.

Authors:  Antonella Vimercati; Rosalba De Nola; Paolo Trerotoli; Maria Elvira Metta; Gerardo Cazzato; Leonardo Resta; Antonio Malvasi; Archiropita Lepera; Ilaria Ricci; Manuela Capozza; Nicola Laforgia; Ettore Cicinelli
Journal:  Vaccines (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-21

7.  Increase in preterm stillbirths in association with reduction in iatrogenic preterm births during COVID-19 lockdown in Australia: a multicenter cohort study.

Authors:  Lisa Hui; Melvin Barrientos Marzan; Stephanie Potenza; Daniel L Rolnik; Natasha Pritchard; Joanne M Said; Kirsten R Palmer; Clare L Whitehead; Penelope M Sheehan; Jolyon Ford; Ben W Mol; Susan P Walker
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2022-04-19       Impact factor: 10.693

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.