Prenatal and postpartum maternal mental health and neonatal motor outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background: Rates of prenatal and postpartum stress and depression in pregnant individuals have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Perinatal maternal mental health has been linked to worse motor development in offspring, with motor deficits appearing in infancy and early childhood. We aimed to evaluate the relationship between prenatal and postpartum stress and depression and motor outcome in infants born during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: One hundred and seventeen participants completed an online prospective survey study at two timepoints: during pregnancy and within 2 months postpartum. Depression was self-reported using the Edinburgh Perinatal/Postpartum Depression Scale (EPDS), and stress via the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS). Mothers reported total infant motor ability (fine and gross) using the interRAI 0–3 Developmental Domains questionnaire. Results: Prenatal (EPDS median=10.0, interquartile range[IQR]=6.0 – 14.0, B=-0.035, 95%CI=-0.062 to -0.007, p = 0.014) and postpartum maternal depression outcomes (median=7, IQR=4–12, B=-0.037, 95%CI= -0.066 to -0.008, p = 0.012) were significantlynegatively associated with total infant motor ability. Neither pregnancy nor postpartum perceived stress was associated with infant motor function. A cluster analysis revealed that preterm and low-birth weight infants whose mothers reported elevated depressive symptoms during pregnancy and in the postpartum period had the poorest motor outcomes. Conclusions: Prenatal and postpartum depression, but not stress, was associated with early infant motor abilities. Preterm and low-birth weight infants whose mothers reported elevated depressive symptoms maybe at-risk of experiencing poor motor outcomes. These results highlight the importance of identifying pre- and postnatal maternal mental health issues, especially during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic

Machine learning-based predictive modeling of resilience to stressors in pregnant women during COVID-19: A prospective cohort study

During the COVID-19 pandemic, pregnant women have been at high risk for psychological distress. Lifestyle factors may be modifiable elements to help reduce and promote resilience to prenatal stress. We used Machine-Learning (ML) algorithms applied to questionnaire data obtained from an international cohort of 804 pregnant women to determine whether physical activity and diet were resilience factors against prenatal stress, and whether stress levels were in turn predictive of sleep classes. A support vector machine accurately classified perceived stress levels in pregnant women based on physical activity behaviours and dietary behaviours. In turn, we classified hours of sleep based on perceived stress levels. This research adds to a developing consensus concerning physical activity and diet, and the association with prenatal stress and sleep in pregnant women. Predictive modeling using ML approaches may be used as a screening tool and to promote positive health behaviours for pregnant women

Issues potentially affecting quality of life arising from long-term medicines use: a qualitative study

Background Polypharmacy is increasing and managing large number of medicines may create a burden for patients. Many patients have negative views of medicines and their use can adversely affect quality of life. No studies have specifically explored the impact of general long-term medicines use on quality of life. Objective To determine the issues which patients taking long-term medicines consider affect their day-to-day lives, including quality of life. Setting Four primary care general practices in North West England Methods Face-to-face interviews with adults living at home, prescribed four or more regular medicines for at least 1 year. Interviewees were identified from primary care medical records and purposively selected to ensure different types of medicines use. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically. Results Twenty-one interviews were conducted and analysed. Patients used an average of 7.8 medicines, 51 % were preventive, 40 % for symptom relief and 9 % treatment. Eight themes emerged: relationships with health professionals, practicalities, information, efficacy, side effects, attitudes, impact and control. Ability to discuss medicines with health professionals varied and many views were coloured by negative experiences, mainly with doctors. All interviewees had developed routines for using multiple medicines, some requiring considerable effort. Few felt able to exert control over medicines routines specified by health professionals. Over half sought additional information about medicines whereas others avoided this, trusting in doctors to guide their medicines use. Patients recognised their inability to assess efficacy for many medicines, notably those used for prophylaxis. All were concerned about possible side effects and some had poor experiences of discussing concerns with doctors. Medicines led to restrictions on social activities and personal life to the extent that, for some, life can revolve around medicines. Conclusion There is a multiplicity and complexity of issues surrounding medicines use, which impact on day-to-day lives for patients with long-term conditions. While most patients adapt to long-term medicines use, others did so at some cost to their quality of life

Current perceptions of statutory supervision of midwifery: time for change

Statutory supervision of midwifery has been in place in the UK for 113 years. Recently, however, the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC, 2015) have voted to accept the recommendations of the King’s fund review (2015) into midwifery regulation, which will see the end of the statutory supervision of midwifery as we know it. Much of the literature on this subject extols the virtues of statutory supervision. The aim of this study is to explore current perceptions of statutory supervision among a sample of midwifery practitioners to establish whether their views and opinions of statutory supervision supports or undermines the provision of care. The data represents a complex picture of supervision. Concerns and challenges arise for all those involved with statutory supervision, which at times does not appear to support the provision of quality care

Susceptibility of hamsters to clostridium difficile isolates of differing toxinotype

Clostridium difficile is the most commonly associated cause of antibiotic associated disease (AAD), which caused ~21,000 cases of AAD in 2011 in the U.K. alone. The golden Syrian hamster model of CDI is an acute model displaying many of the clinical features of C. difficile disease. Using this model we characterised three clinical strains of C. difficile, all differing in toxinotype; CD1342 (PaLoc negative), M68 (toxinotype VIII) and BI-7 (toxinotype III). The naturally occurring non-toxic strain colonised all hamsters within 1-day post challenge (d.p.c.) with high-levels of spores being shed in the faeces of animals that appeared well throughout the entire experiment. However, some changes including increased neutrophil influx and unclotted red blood cells were observed at early time points despite the fact that the known C. difficile toxins (TcdA, TcdB and CDT) are absent from the genome. In contrast, hamsters challenged with strain M68 resulted in a 45% mortality rate, with those that survived challenge remaining highly colonised. It is currently unclear why some hamsters survive infection, as bacterial and toxin levels and histology scores were similar to those culled at a similar time-point. Hamsters challenged with strain BI-7 resulted in a rapid fatal infection in 100% of the hamsters approximately 26 hr post challenge. Severe caecal pathology, including transmural neutrophil infiltrates and extensive submucosal damage correlated with high levels of toxin measured in gut filtrates ex vivo. These data describes the infection kinetics and disease outcomes of 3 clinical C. difficile isolates differing in toxin carriage and provides additional insights to the role of each toxin in disease progression

Budget impact analysis of medicines : updated systematic review and implications

This evaluation determines whether published studies to date meet the key characteristics identified for budget impact analyses (BIA) for medicines, accomplished through a systematic review and assessment against identified key characteristics. Studies from 2001 to 2015 on "budget impact analysis" with "drug" interventions were assessed, selected based on their titles/abstracts and full texts, with their characteristics checked according to key criteria. Out of 1984 studies, 92 were identified. Of these, 95% were published in Europe and the USA. 2012 saw the largest number of publications (16%) with a decline thereafter. 48% met up to 6 or 7 out of the 9 key characteristics. Only 22% stated no conflict of interest. The results indicate low adherence to the key characteristics that should be considered for BIAs and strong conflict of interest. This is an issue since BIAs can be of fundamental importance in managing the entry of new medicines including reimbursement decisions