Pregnancy Outcome during the First COVID 19 Lockdown in Vienna, Austria

Kirchengast, Sylvia; Hartmann, Beda

doi:10.3390/ijerph18073782

Cited by 58 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 68 publications

(146 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of 9123 records in the initial search, 37 articles were eligible for inclusion, of which 36 were used in the quantitative synthesis 2,6‐10,15‐44 (Figure 1). Eighteen full‐text reports were excluded: reasons for the exclusions are provided in Appendix .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Yang

D’Souza

Kharrat

et al. 2021

Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Conflicting reports of increases and decreases in rates of preterm birth (PTB) and stillbirth in the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic have surfaced. The objective of our study was to conduct a living systematic review and meta-analyses of studies reporting pregnancy and neonatal outcomes by comparing the pandemic and pre-pandemic periods. Material and methods:We searched PubMed and Embase databases, reference lists of articles published up until May 14, 2021 and included English language studies that compared outcomes between the COVID-19 pandemic time period vs. pre-pandemic time periods. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis using the inverse variance method.Results: Thirty-seven studies with low-to-moderate risk of bias, reporting on 1,677,858 pregnancies during the pandemic period and 21,028,650 pregnancies during the pre-pandemic period, were included.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Yang

D’Souza

Kharrat

et al. 2021

Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of 9953 records in the initial search, 45 articles were eligible for inclusion, of which 44 were used in the quantitative synthesis 2 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 (Figure 1 ). Twenty‐six full‐text reports were excluded: reasons for the exclusions are provided in Appendix S2 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Yang

D’Souza

Kharrat

et al. 2021

Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Conflicting reports of increases and decreases in rates of preterm birth (PTB) and stillbirth in the general population during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic have surfaced. The objective of our study was to conduct a living systematic review and meta‐analyses of studies reporting pregnancy and neonatal outcomes by comparing the pandemic and pre‐pandemic periods. Material and methods We searched PubMed and Embase databases, reference lists of articles published up until August 14, 2021 and included English language studies that compared outcomes between the COVID‐19 pandemic time period and the pre‐pandemic time periods. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa scale. We conducted random‐effects meta‐analysis using the inverse variance method. Results Forty‐five studies with low‐to‐moderate risk of bias, reporting on 1 843 665 pregnancies during the pandemic period and 23 564 552 pregnancies during the pre‐pandemic period, were included. There was significant reduction in unadjusted estimates of PTB (35 studies, unadjusted odds ratio [uaOR] 0.95, 95% CI 0.92–0.98), but not in adjusted estimates (six studies, adjusted OR [aOR] 0.95, 95% CI 0.80–1.13). This reduction was noted in studies from single centers/health areas (25 studies, uaOR 0.90, 95% CI 0.86–0.96) but not in regional/national studies (10 studies, uaOR 0.99, 95% CI 0.95–1.02). There was reduction in spontaneous PTB (six studies, uaOR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81–0.96) and induced PTB (five studies, uaOR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81–0.97). There was no difference in the odds of stillbirth between the pandemic and pre‐pandemic time periods (24 studies, uaOR 1.11, 95% CI 0.97–1.26 and four studies, aOR 1.06, 95% CI 0.81–1.38). There was an increase in mean birthweight during the pandemic period compared with the pre‐pandemic period (six studies, mean difference 17 g, 95% CI 7–28 g). The odds of maternal mortality were increased (four studies, uaOR 1.15, 95% CI 1.05–1.26); however, only unadjusted estimates were available and the result was mostly influenced by one study from Mexico. There was significant publication bias for the outcome of PTB. Conclusions The COVID‐19 pandemic may be associated with a reduction in PTB; however, referral bias cannot be excluded. There was no statistically significant difference in stillbirth between pandemic and pre‐pandemic periods.

show abstract

“…Our observations concur with the results of another study, which did not observe any effects of the pandemic on gestation or birth weight. 35 Different researchers have observed variable impacts on birth weight; however, most of these studies have been limited to shorter periods. 21 We did not observe any changes in feeding patterns.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Well-Baby Nursery

Kocherlakota

Lin²,

Gill³

et al. 2021

Am J Perinatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is associated with fewer deliveries and premature births; however, the impact of this pandemic on the well-baby nursery (WBN) is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on infants admitted to the WBN by comparing pandemic and pre-pandemic cohorts. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective study of infants admitted to a WBN during the pandemic period (March 18, 2020-to-March 17, 2021) and compared them to those during the pre-pandemic period (March 18, 2019-to-March 17, 2020). Maternal (age, parity, gestation, method of delivery, and COVID-19 status) and neonatal (sex, weight, Apgar score, feeding pattern, urine toxicology, and neonatal intensive care unit [NICU] admission) data were collected and compared between the two periods. The results were statistically analyzed, and significance was set at P < 0.05. RESULTS: There were 824 and 859 WBN admissions during the pandemic and pre-pandemic periods, respectively; a 4% decrease in WBN admissions during the pandemic period. During the pandemic period, the number of deliveries among nulliparous women increased (from 40.3% to 45.1%; p=0.01), and deliveries among multiparous women decreased (from 59.2% to 53.1%; p=0.01). The number of infants exposed to marijuana in-utero increased (24/149 screened vs. 12/146 screened; p=0.038), and transfers from WBN to NICU decreased (from 9% to 6%; p=0.044) during the pandemic period. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the pre-pandemic period, the number of WBN admissions, multiparous deliveries, and NICU admissions decreased, while the number of nulliparous deliveries and infants exposed to marijuana in-utero increased during the pandemic period.

show abstract

Pregnancy Outcome during the First COVID 19 Lockdown in Vienna, Austria

Cited by 58 publications

References 68 publications

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

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

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

Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Well-Baby Nursery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About