BACKGROUND Treatment of asthma symptoms during pregnancy is crucial for maternal and fetal health. Short‐acting beta2‐agonists (SABA) are frequently used as rescue medications and long‐acting beta2‐agonists (LABA) are used as add‐on controller therapy for asthma during pregnancy. OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to investigate the association between exposure to SABA and LABA in the first trimester of pregnancy and the risk of congenital malformations among women with asthma. METHODS A cohort of pregnancies from women with asthma was formed through linkage of three administrative databases from Québec, Canada. The primary outcomes were major and any congenital malformations. The primary exposures were exposure to SABA and LABA during the first trimester, while secondary exposure was weekly SABA doses. The associations between congenital malformations (any, major, and specific) and SABA and LABA exposure were assessed with generalized estimating equations models. RESULTS From a group of 13,117 pregnancies, we identified 1242 and 762 infants with any (9.5%) and major (5.8%) congenital malformations, respectively. The adjusted odds ratios (95% confidence interval [CI]) for any malformations associated with the use of SABA and LABA were 1.04 (95% CI, 0.92–1.17) and 1.37 (95% CI, 0.92–2.17), respectively. The corresponding figures were 0.93 (95% CI, 0.80–1.08) and 1.31 (95% CI, 0.74–2.31) for major malformations. Significant increased risks of major “cardiac” and major “other and unspecified” congenital malformations were observed with LABA use. CONCLUSION Our study supports the evidence of SABA safety during pregnancy, but more research is required to assess whether the increased risk of malformations among LABA users is due to the medication, bias by asthma severity, or chance alone. Birth Defects Research (Part A) 2011. © 2011 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Background Since the emergence of COVID-19, preventative public health measures, including lockdown strategies, were declared in most countries to control viral transmission. Recent studies and anecdotes have reported changes in the prevalence of perinatal outcomes during national COVID-19lockdowns.The objective of this rapid review was to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 lockdowns on the incidence of low birth weight (LBW), preterm birth (PTB), and stillbirth. Methods Two reviewers searched EMBASE, CORD-19, LitCovid (PubMed), WHO Global research on corona virus disease (COVID-19), and MedRxiv for studies published in English from the first reports on COVID-19 until 17 July 2021. Perinatal outcomes of interest included LBW (< 2500 g), PTB (< 37 weeks), and stillbirth. Results Of the 1967 screened articles, 17 publications met the inclusion criteria (14 cohort studies, 1 case control and 2 cross-sectional studies). Studies included data from Denmark, UK, Ireland, Nepal, Italy, Israel, Botswana, Australia, China, Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, Austria, Zimbabwe, India, and Spain. The total sample size ranged from 3399 to 1,599,547 pregnant women. Thirteen studies examined PTB with conflicting results, reporting both an increase and a decrease in PTB incidence, with odds ratios [95% CI] ranging from 0.09 [0.01, 0.40] to 1.93 [0.76, 4.79]. Three studies found a decrease in LBW rates during lockdowns, one of which was statistically significant, with a rate ratio of 3.77 [1.21, 11.75]. Ten studies examined stillbirth rates, including four studies reporting a statistically significant increase in stillbirth rates, with adjusted relative risk ranging from 1.46 [1.13, 1.89] to 3.9 [1.83, 12.0]. Fourteen studies contained data that could be combined in a meta-analysis comparing perinatal outcomes before and during lockdown. We found that lockdown measures were associated with a significant risk of stillbirth with RR = 1.33 [95% CI 1.04, 1.69] when compared to before lockdown period. However, lockdown measures were not associated with a significant risk of PTB, LBW and VLBW compared to prepandemic periods. Conclusions This review provides clues about the severity of the indirect influence of COVID-19 lockdown implementation; however, the criteria that lead to unexpected changes in LBW, PTB, and stillbirth remains unclear. Large studies showed conflicting results, reporting both increases and decreases in selected perinatal outcomes. Pooled results show a significant association between lockdown measures and stillbirth rates, but not low birth weight rates. Further studies examining the differences in other countries’ lockdowns and sociodemographic groups from low to middle-income countries are needed. Exploration of perinatal outcomes during COVID-19 lockdown poses an opportunity to learn from and make changes to promote the reduction of the leading causes of childhood mortality worldwide.

No abstract

Methodological limitations and lack of power of several studies prevent us to conclude on the perinatal safety of beta2-agonists. Until further evidence is available, physicians should continue prescribing them as recommended in the guidelines whenever needed to attain asthma control.

Objectives The increasing spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 has prompted Canada to take unprecedented measures. The objective of this study was to examine the impact of the implemented public health measures on the incidence of COVID-19 in Manitoba. Results Using the COVID-19 dataset, we examined the temporal trends of daily reported COVID-19 cases and the coinciding public health measures implemented from March 12, 2020 to February 28, 2022. We calculated the 7-day moving average and crude COVID-19 infection rate/100,000 Manitobans. Due to the restrictions applied, the infection rate decreased from 2.4 (April 1) to 0.07 infections (May 1, 2020). Between May 4 and July 17, 2020, the reported cases stabilized, and some restrictions were lifted. However, in November, the cases peaked with infection rate of 29. Additional restrictions were implemented, and the rate dropped to 3.6 infections on March 31, 2021. As of August 2021, 62.8% of eligible Manitobans received two vaccine doses. The infection rate increased to 128.3 infections on December 31, 2021 and mitigation measures were implemented. This study describes how physical distancing in conjunction with other containment measures can reduce the COVID-19 burden. Future studies into the extent of the implementation of the restrictions are necessary.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and public health measures that took place have led to concerns regarding mental health and receipt of psychotropic medications. We aimed to study the changes in psychotropic medication dispensation rates before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in the general population.Methods: Administrative health data from the Canadian province of Manitoba was used to describe the quarterly incidence and prevalence of antipsychotics, antidepressants, and anxiolytic/sedative-hypnotics from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2020. Individuals who received at least one prescription within each quarter were considered exposed to the medication. The denominator was the total population within each quarter. Incidence was defined as no receipt of medication in the 3 years prior to the quarter of interest. Autoregression models for time series data plus indicator variables were used to compare each quarter of 2020 after public health measures were implemented in March 2020 in relation to the expected trend. Analyses were stratified by age and sex.Results: There were 1,394,885 individuals in the first quarter of 2020, with a mean (SD) age of 38.9 (23.4) years, 50.3% were female, and 36.1% had a psychiatric diagnosis in the previous 5 years. A significant decrease was observed for incident antidepressant use (p &lt; 0.05 for both sexes and all age groups except for those 65 years and older) and anxiolytic use (p &lt; 0.05 for both sexes and all age groups except 80 years and older) in the second quarter (April-June) of 2020 compared to the expected trend. Females and those aged 40 years and older had a significantly higher incidence of antidepressant and antipsychotic use in the final quarter of 2020 compared to the expected trend (p &lt; 0.05).Conclusion: Our findings indicate a decrease in new prescriptions for antidepressants and anxiolytics in the 3 months after COVID-19 in-person restrictions were first implemented. We then observed an increase in the new use of antidepressants and antipsychotics at the end of 2020, in females and people aged 40 years and older, with the highest rates of use in the population 80 years and older.

No abstract

The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on maternal mental health has been described in Canada and China but no study has compared the two countries using the same standardized and validated instruments. In this study, we aimed to evaluate and compare the impact of COVID-19 public health policies on maternal mental health between Canada and China, as we hypothesize that geographical factors and different COVID-19 policies are likely to influence maternal mental health. Pregnant persons >18 years old were recruited in Canada and China using a web-based strategy. All participants recruited between 26 June 2020 and 16 February 2021 were analyzed. Self-reported data included sociodemographic variables, COVID-19 experience and maternal mental health assessments (Edinburgh Perinatal Depression Scale (EPDS), Generalized Anxiety Disorders (GAD-7) scale, stress and satisfaction with life). Analyses were stratified by recruitment cohort, namely: Canada 1 (26 June 2020–10 October 2020), Canada 2 and China (11 October 2020–16 February 2021). Overall, 2423 participants were recruited, with 1804 participants within Canada 1, 135 within Canada 2 and 484 in China. The mean EDPS scores were 8.1 (SD, 5.1) in Canada 1, 8.1 (SD, 5.2) in Canada 2 and 7.7 (SD, 4.9) in China (p-value Canada 2/China: p = 0.005). The mean GAD-7 scores were 2.6 (SD, 2.9) in China, 4.3 (SD, 3.8) in Canada 1 (p < 0.001) and 5.8 (SD, 5.2) in Canada 2 (p < 0.001). When adjusting for stress and anxiety, being part of the Chinese cohort significantly increased the chances of having maternal depression by over threefold (adjusted OR 3.20, 95%CI 1.77–5.78). Canadian and Chinese participants reported depressive scores nearly double those of other crises and non-pandemic periods. Lockdowns and reopening periods have an important impact on levels of depression and anxiety among pregnant persons.