Towards reducing variations in infant mortality and morbidity : a population-based approach

Background: Our aims were (1) to improve understanding of regional variation in early-life mortality rates and the UK’s poor performance in international comparisons; and (2) to identify the extent to which late and moderately preterm (LMPT) birth contributes to early childhood mortality and morbidity. Objective: To undertake a programme of linked population-based research studies to work towards reducing variations in infant mortality and morbidity rates. Design: Two interlinked streams: (1) a detailed analysis of national and regional data sets and (2) establishment of cohorts of LMPT babies and term-born control babies. Setting: Cohorts were drawn from the geographically defined areas of Leicestershire and Nottinghamshire, and analyses were carried out at the University of Leicester. Data sources: For stream 1, national data were obtained from four sources: the Office for National Statistics, NHS Numbers for Babies, Centre for Maternal and Child Enquiries and East Midlands and South Yorkshire Congenital Anomalies Register. For stream 2, prospective data were collected for 1130 LMPT babies and 1255 term-born control babies. Main outcome measures: Detailed analysis of stillbirth and early childhood mortality rates with a particular focus on factors leading to biased or unfair comparison; review of clinical, health economic and developmental outcomes over the first 2 years of life for LMPT and term-born babies. Results: The deprivation gap in neonatal mortality has widened over time, despite government efforts to reduce it. Stillbirth rates are twice as high in the most deprived as in the least deprived decile. Approximately 70% of all infant deaths are the result of either preterm birth or a major congenital abnormality, and these are heavily influenced by mothers’ exposure to deprivation. Births at < 24 weeks’ gestation constitute only 1% of all births, but account for 20% of infant mortality. Classification of birth status for these babies varies widely across England. Risk of LMPT birth is greatest in the most deprived groups within society. Compared with term-born peers, LMPT babies are at an increased risk of neonatal morbidity, neonatal unit admission and poorer long-term health and developmental outcomes. Cognitive and socioemotional development problems confer the greatest long-term burden, with the risk being amplified by socioeconomic factors. During the first 24 months of life each child born LMPT generates approximately £3500 of additional health and societal costs. Conclusions: Health professionals should be cautious in reviewing unadjusted early-life mortality rates, particularly when these relate to individual trusts. When more sophisticated analysis is not possible, babies of < 24 weeks’ gestation should be excluded. Neonatal services should review the care they offer to babies born LMPT to ensure that it is appropriate to their needs. The risk of adverse outcome is low in LMPT children. However, the risk appears higher for some types of antenatal problems and when the mother is from a deprived background

Venous thromboembolism in women: a specific reproductive health risk

background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a specific reproductive health risk for women. methods: Searches were performed in Medline and other databases. The selection criteria were high-quality studies and studies relevant to clinical reproductive medicine. Summaries were presented and discussed by the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology Workshop Group. results: VTE is a multifactorial disease with a baseline annual incidence around 50 per 100 000 at 25 years and 120 per 100 000 at age 50. Its major complication is pulmonary embolism, causing death in 1-2% of patients. Higher VTE risk is associated with an inherited thrombophilia in men and women. Changes in the coagulation system and in the risk of clinical VTE in women also occur during pregnancy, with the use of reproductive hormones and as a consequence of ovarian stimulation when hyperstimulation syndrome and conception occur together. In pregnancy, the risk of VTE is increased 5-fold, while the use of combined hormonal contraception (CHC) doubles the risk and this relative risk is higher with the more recent pills containing desogestrel, gestodene and drospirenone when compared with those with levonorgestrel. Similarly, hormone replacement therapy (HRT) increases the VTE risk 2-to 4-fold. There is a synergistic effect between thrombophilia and the various reproductive risks. Prevention of VTE during pregnancy should be offered to women with specific risk factors. In women who are at high risk, CHC and HRT should be avoided. conclusions: Clinicians managing pregnancy or treating women for infertility or prescribing CHC and HRT should be aware of the increased risks of VTE and the need to take a careful medical history to identify additional co-existing risks, and should be able to diagnose VTE and know how to approach its prevention

Improving pregnancy outcome in obese women: the UK Pregnancies Better Eating and Activity randomised controlled Trial

Background: Obesity in pregnancy is associated with insulin resistance, which underpins many common complications including gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and fetal macrosomia. Objectives: To assess the effect of a complex behavioural intervention based on diet and physical activity (PA) on the risk of GDM and delivery of a large-for-gestational age (LGA) infant. Design: Three phases: (1) the development phase, (2) the pilot study and (3) a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing a behavioural intervention to improve glycaemic control with standard antenatal care in obese pregnant women. A cost–utility analysis was undertaken to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the health training (intervention) over and above standard care (control). Setting: Pilot study: antenatal clinics in four inner-city UK hospitals. RCT: eight antenatal clinics in eight UK inner-city hospitals. Participants: Women were eligible for inclusion if they had a body mass index of ≥ 30 kg/m2, were pregnant with a single fetus and at 15+0 to 18+6 weeks’ gestation, were able to give written informed consent and were without predefined disorders. Intervention: The intervention comprised an initial session with a health trainer, followed by eight weekly sessions. Dietary advice recommended foods with a low dietary glycaemic index, avoidance of sugar-sweetened beverages and reduced saturated fats. Women were encouraged to increase daily PA. Main outcome measures: Development phase: intervention development, acceptability and optimal approach for delivery. Pilot study: change in dietary and PA behaviours at 28 weeks’ gestation. RCT: the primary outcome of the RCT was, for the mother, GDM [as measured by the International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG)’s diagnostic criteria] and, for the infant, LGA delivery (i.e. customised birthweight ≥ 90th centile for gestational age). Results: Development phase: following a literature meta-analysis, a study of dietary intention questionnaires and semistructured interviews, an intervention based on behavioural science was developed that incorporated optimal and acceptable methods for delivery. Pilot study: the pilot study demonstrated improvement in dietary behaviours in the intervention compared with the standard care arm but no increase in objectively measured PA. Process evaluation demonstrated feasibility and general acceptability. RCT: the RCT showed no effect of the intervention on GDM in obese pregnant women or the number of deliveries of LGA infants. There was a reduction in dietary glycaemic load (GL) and reduced saturated fat intake, an increase in PA and a modest reduction in gestational weight gain, all secondary outcomes. Lower than expected was the number of LGA infant deliveries in all women, which suggested that universal screening for GDM with IADPSG’s diagnostic criteria, and subsequent treatment, may reduce the number of deliveries of LGA infants. According to the cost–utility analysis, the estimated probability that the UK Pregnancies Better Eating and Activity Trial (UPBEAT) behavioural intervention is cost-effective at the £30,000/quality-adjusted life-year willingness-to-pay threshold was 1%. Limitations: Included the high refusal rate for participation and self-reported assessment of diet and PA. Conclusions: The UPBEAT intervention, an intense theoretically based intervention in obese pregnant women, did not reduce the risk of GDM in women or the number of LGA infant deliveries, despite successfully reducing the dietary GL. Based on total cost to the NHS provider and health gains, the UPBEAT intervention provided no supporting evidence to suggest that the intervention represents value for money based on the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence benchmarks for cost-effectiveness. Future work: Alternative strategies for reducing the risk of GDM in obese pregnant women and the number of LGA infant deliveries should be considered, including development of clinically effective interventions to prevent obesity in women of reproductive age, of clinically effective interventions to reduce weight retention following pregnancy and of risk stratification tools in early pregnancy. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN89971375 and UK Clinical Research Network Portfolio 5035. Funding: This project was funded by the NIHR Programme Grant for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research, Vol. 5, No. 10. See the NIHR journals library website for further project information. Contributions to funding were also provided by the Chief Scientist Office CZB/4/680, Scottish Government Health Directorates, Edinburgh; Guys and St Thomas’ Charity, Tommy’s Charity (Lucilla Poston, Annette L Briley, Paul T Seed) and the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust and King’s College London, UK and the Academy of Finland, Finland. Keith M Godfrey was supported by the National Institute for Health Research through the NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre. Lucilla Poston and Keith M Godfrey were supported by the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013), project EarlyNutrition under grant agreement number 289346