more than 11 million people have been infected with coronavirus disease 2019 and almost 250,000 people have died from the disease in the United States, less than 1 year since its discovery. Although literature is beginning to emerge on pregnancy as a risk factor for severe coronavirus disease 2019, these studies are heterogeneous and use primary outcomes such as intensive care unit admission or hospitalization as surrogate markers that may subject analyses to misclassification bias in pregnant patients. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 among pregnant women with symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 compared with nonpregnant women using nonadmissionbased, standardized clinical criteria for severe disease. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study of women aged 13 to 45 years and diagnosed as having symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 between May 28, 2020, and July 22, 2020. The primary outcome was severe coronavirus disease 2019 as defined by 2 sets of nonadmission-based, clinical criteria: the World Health Organization Ordinal Scale for Clinical Improvement and the Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia Emergency Response Epidemiology Team. Adjusted risk ratios were estimated using multivariable logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Of 262 women aged 13 to 45 years with symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019, 22 (8.4%) were pregnant and 240 (91.6%) were nonpregnant. After adjusting for covariates potentially associated with the primary outcome, symptomatic pregnant women were at a significantly increased risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 compared with nonpregnant women using both the World Health Organization Ordinal Scale for Clinical Improvement (adjusted relative risk, 3.59; 95% confidence interval, 1.49−7.01) and Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia Emergency Response Epidemiology Team (adjusted relative risk, 5.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.36−17.31) criteria. CONCLUSION: Pregnancy significantly increases the risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 as defined by nonadmission-based, clinical criteria.
Because the obstetrical population seems to have a high proportion of asymptomatic patients who are carriers of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, universal testing has been proposed as a strategy to risk-stratify all obstetrical admissions and guide infection prevention protocols. Here, we describe a case of a critically ill obstetrical patient with all the clinical symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 and 3 false-negative results of nasopharyngeal swabs for molecular testing. We review and discuss the uncertain clinical characteristics of current severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 molecular testing and the implications of false-negative results in the obstetrical population.
OBJECTIVE: To understand severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing uptake in the labor and delivery unit and rationales for declining testing, and to institute a process to increase equitable testing uptake. METHODS: We conducted a quality-improvement initiative from May 28–June 25, 2020, during the first 4 weeks of universal SARS-CoV-2 testing in the Barnes-Jewish Hospital labor and delivery unit. All consecutive patients presenting for delivery without coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms were offered testing over four 1-week phases. Phase I documented the rate of testing uptake. Phase II recorded patients' reasons for declining testing. Phase III used phase II findings to create and implement shared decision-making tools. Phase IV offered each patient who declined nasopharyngeal testing an oropharyngeal alternative. The primary outcome was rate of SARS-CoV-2 testing uptake by phase. RESULTS: Of 270 patients, 223 (83%) accepted testing and 47 (17%) declined. Maternal age and mode of delivery were similar between groups, whereas testing uptake was higher among nulliparous, White, Hispanic, or privately insured patients. There was a significant increase in the primary outcome of SARS-CoV-2 testing across phases I–IV, from 68% to 76% to 94% to 95%, respectively (Somers' D 0.45; 95% CI of association 0.30–0.59). The most commonly cited reason for declining testing was concern regarding testing discomfort. In subgroup analyses by race and insurance type, there was a significant increase in testing uptake across phases I–IV for Black patients (56%, 54%, 91%, 92%; Somers' D 0.36; 95% CI of association 0.28–0.64), White patients (76%, 93%, 96%, 100%; Somers' D 0.59; 95% CI of association 0.38–0.8), those with Medicaid insurance (60%, 64%, 88%, 92%; 95%; Somers' D 0.39; CI of association 0.22 to 0.56), and those with private insurance (77%, 96%, 97%, 100%; Somers' D 0.63; 95% CI of association 0.40–0.86). CONCLUSION: Universal SARS-CoV-2 testing uptake significantly increased through a rapid-cycle improvement initiative. Aligning hospital policy with patient-centered approaches led to nearly universally acceptable testing.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.