Introduction Evidence on perinatal mental health during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic and its potential determinants is limited. Therefore, this multinational study aimed to assess the mental health status of pregnant and breastfeeding women during the pandemic, and to explore potential associations between depressive symptoms, anxiety, and stress and women's sociodemographic, health, and reproductive characteristics. Material and methods A cross‐sectional, web‐based study was performed in Ireland, Norway, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and the UK between 16 June and 14 July 2020. Pregnant and breastfeeding women up to 3 months postpartum who were older than 18 years of age were eligible. The online, anonymous survey was promoted through social media and hospital websites. The Edinburgh Depression Scale (EDS), the Generalized Anxiety Disorder seven‐item scale (GAD‐7), and the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) were used to assess mental health status. Regression model analysis was used to identify factors associated with poor mental health status. Results In total, 9041 women participated (including 3907 pregnant and 5134 breastfeeding women). The prevalence of major depressive symptoms (EDS ≥ 13) was 15% in the pregnancy cohort and and 13% the breastfeeding cohort. Moderate to severe generalized anxiety symptoms (GAD ≥ 10) were found among 11% and 10% of the pregnant and breastfeeding women. The mean (±SD) PSS scores for pregnant and breastfeeding women were 14.1 ± 6.6 and 13.7 ± 6.6, respectively. Risk factors associated with poor mental health included having a chronic mental illness, a chronic somatic illness in the postpartum period, smoking, having an unplanned pregnancy, professional status, and living in the UK or Ireland. Conclusions This multinational study found high levels of depressive symptoms and generalized anxiety among pregnant and breastfeeding women during the COVID‐19 outbreak. The study findings underline the importance of monitoring perinatal mental health during pandemics and other societal crises to safeguard maternal and infant mental health.

The COVID-19 pandemic may be of particular concern for pregnant and breastfeeding women. We aimed to explore their beliefs about the coronavirus and COVID-19 vaccine willingness and to assess the impact of the pandemic on perinatal experiences and practices. A multinational, cross-sectional, web-based study was performed in six European countries between April and July 2020. The anonymous survey was promoted via social media. In total, 16,063 women participated (including 6661 pregnant and 9402 breastfeeding women). Most responses were collected from Belgium (44%), Norway (18%) and the Netherlands (16%), followed by Switzerland (11%), Ireland (10%) and the UK (3%). Despite differences between countries, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was identified among 40–50% of the respondents at the end of the first wave of the pandemic and was higher among pregnant women. Education level and employment status were associated with vaccine hesitancy. The first wave had an adverse impact on pregnancy experiences and disrupted access to health services and breastfeeding support for many women. In the future, access to health care and support should be maintained at all times. Evidence-based and tailored information on COVID-19 vaccines should also be provided to pregnant and breastfeeding women to avoid unfounded concerns about the vaccines and to support shared decision making in this population.

As pregnant women are at high risk of severe SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccines are available in Switzerland, this study aimed to assess the willingness of Swiss pregnant and breastfeeding women to become vaccinated. Through a cross-sectional online study conducted after the first pandemic wave, vaccination practices and willingness to become vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 if a vaccine was available were evaluated through binary, multi-choice, and open-ended questions. Factors associated with vaccine willingness were evaluated through univariable and multivariable analysis. A total of 1551 women responded to questions related to the primary outcome. Only 29.7% (153/515) of pregnant and 38.6% (400/1036) of breastfeeding women were willing to get vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 if a vaccine had been available during the first wave. Positive predictors associated with SARS-CoV-2 vaccine acceptance were an age older than 40 years, a higher educational level, history of influenza vaccination within the previous year, having an obstetrician as the primary healthcare practitioner, and being in their third trimester of pregnancy. After the first pandemic wave, Switzerland had a low SARS-CoV-2 vaccination acceptance rate, emphasizing the need to identify and reduce barriers for immunization in pregnant and breastfeeding women, particularly among the youngest and those with a lower educational level.

Since December 2019, the novel SARS-CoV-2 outbreak has resulted in millions of cases and more than 200 000 deaths worldwide. The clinical course among nonpregnant women has been described, but data about potential risks for women and their fetus remain scarce. The SARS and MERS epidemics were responsible for miscarriages, adverse fetal and neonatal outcomes, and maternal deaths. For COVID-19 infection, only nine cases of maternal death have been reported as of 22 April 2020, and pregnant women seem to develop the same clinical presentation as the general population. However, severe maternal cases, as well as prematurity, fetal distress, and stillbirth among newborns have been reported. The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic greatly impacts prenatal management and surveillance and raise the need for clear unanimous guidelines. In this narrative review, we describe the current knowledge about coronaviruses (SARS, MERS, and SARS-CoV-2) risks and consequences on pregnancies, and we summarize available current candidate therapeutic options for pregnant women. Finally, we compare current guidance proposed by The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the World Health Organization to give an overview of prenatal management which should be utilized until future data appear. 1 | INTRODUCTION In December 2019, multiple cases of pneumonia of unknown origin were reported in the Province of Wuhan, China, and rapidly attributed to a novel coronavirus, closely related to the 2003 severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS-CoV) and therefore named the SARS 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This new virus spread throughout China and rapidly covered the globe causing over 2 million cases and more than 200 000 deaths within the recent months. The World Health Organization (WHO) declared this outbreak a pandemic on 11 March 2020 (Figure 1). Although numerous reports have described the clinical course of COVID-19 among nonpregnant patients, data regarding pregnant women remain scarce. 12 Recent outbreaks of emerging infections have highlighted their potential impact on pregnant women and/or their fetus, such as the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic 3 or more recently, the Zika virus outbreak in the Americas. 4 As information regarding this novel coronavirus is lacking, data on SARS-CoV-1 (2003) and MERS-CoV (Middle East respiratory syndrome, 2012) may help us understand the potential risks for pregnancy in the context of COVID-19. In this narrative review, we described the current knowledge (up to 22 April 2020) about the risks and consequences of SARS-CoV-2 on pregnant women and their babies and compare them to SARS and MERS. Because therapeutic options and clinical management remain unclear, we summarize information about treatments that have been tried or could be considered for COVID-19 affected pregnancies. Finally, we compare current guidelines proposed by the The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG), The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), and WHO to g...

Insight into the epidemiology of perinatal medication use during the COVID-19 pandemic is scarce. Therefore, a cross-sectional study using an anonymous web survey was performed in Ireland, Norway, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and United Kingdom (UK) to investigate the prevalence and type of medications used by pregnant and breast-feeding women during the first pandemic wave. Factors associated with medication use were estimated by logistic regression. In total, 8378 women participated (i.e., 3666 pregnant and 4712 breastfeeding women). Most responses were collected in Norway (34%) and the Netherlands (28%), followed by Switzerland (19%), Ireland (17%) and UK (2%). Participants were more often professionally active and more often had a higher educational level compared to the general birthing population in each country. Overall, approximately 60% of women reported having used at least 1 medication in the preceding 3 months. Daily and occasional use was reported by 34% and 42% of pregnant and 29% and 44% of breastfeeding women. The most prevalent ATC (Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical) categories were the nervous system, the respiratory system, the alimentary tract/metabolism, and the musculo-skeletal system. Paracetamol, ibuprofen, antacids, and cetirizine were the most frequently used medications. The rate of antibacterial use was lower than previously reported. Having a chronic illness, country, maternal age, SARS-CoV-2 testing, professional status and time since delivery were associated with medication use. In conclusion, perinatal medication use was highly prevalent during the first pandemic wave, underlining the importance of maintaining counseling efforts on medication use, even in times of disrupted healthcare services and/or limited resources.

Information on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pregnancy and breastfeeding experiences, as well as on perinatal mental health in Switzerland is limited. In Switzerland, there are few national studies and little information. Using an anonymous online survey accessible after the first wave of the outbreak in Switzerland, we have investigated how this pandemic affected pregnant and breastfeeding women. Among women who completed the survey, 69.0% (1050/1518) indicated the first wave of the pandemic affected their personal habits, 61.0% (689/ 1131) were affected in their work and 40.0% (632/1573) reported impaired relations with healthcare services (different denominators correspond to the number of participants who answered the question). 36.8% (110/299) of women reported an impact of the pandemic on their current pregnancy experience or breastfeeding experience (8.2%, 46/555). Overall, 11.6% (170/1467) of participants who completed the validated screening tests for mental health symptoms (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale, Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7, Perceived Stress Scale) presented a score compatible with symptoms of major depression, severe anxiety or high perceived stress, which is higher than in the pre-pandemic period according to literature. Risk factors independently associated with impaired mental health were being hospitalized, having symptoms of COVID-19, living with a person with COVID-19 symptoms, having comorbidities, having experienced reduced healthcare services, having restricted usual activities and being a housewife. Protective factors independently associated were a high level of education and living with a partner. Our findings suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic might have significantly affected the well-being and mental health of pregnant and breastfeeding women, directly in the case of exposure, and indirectly as a result of the potential modifications in their life habits and in healthcare facilities.

We would like to thank Stroobandt, S. and Stroobandt, R. for showing interest in our paper [...]

Metabolic syndrome (MetS) refers to cardiometabolic risk factors, such as visceral obesity, dyslipidemia, hyperglycemia/insulin resistance, arterial hypertension and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Individuals born after intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) are particularly at risk of developing metabolic/hepatic disorders later in life. Oxidative stress and cellular senescence have been associated with MetS and are observed in infants born following IUGR. However, whether these mechanisms could be particularly associated with the development of NAFLD in these individuals is still unknown. IUGR was induced in rats by a maternal low-protein diet during gestation versus. a control (CTRL) diet. In six-month-old offspring, we observed an increased visceral fat mass, glucose intolerance, and hepatic alterations (increased transaminase levels, triglyceride and neutral lipid deposit) in male rats with induced IUGR compared with the CTRL males; no differences were found in females. In IUGR male livers, we identified some markers of stress-induced premature senescence (SIPS) (lipofuscin deposit, increased protein expression of p21WAF, p16INK4a and Acp53, but decreased pRb/Rb ratio, foxo-1 and sirtuin-1 protein and mRNA expression) associated with oxidative stress (higher superoxide anion levels, DNA damages, decreased Cu/Zn SOD, increased catalase protein expression, increased nfe2 and decreased keap1 mRNA expression). Impaired lipogenesis pathways (decreased pAMPK/AMPK ratio, increased pAKT/AKT ratio, SREBP1 and PPARγ protein expression) were also observed in IUGR male livers. At birth, no differences were observed in liver histology, markers of SIPS and oxidative stress between CTRL and IUGR males. These data demonstrate that the livers of IUGR males at adulthood display SIPS and impaired liver structure and function related to oxidative stress and allow the identification of specific therapeutic strategies to limit or prevent adverse consequences of IUGR, particularly metabolic and hepatic disorders.