Changes in Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes Associated With the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Sun S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8520131 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Changes in Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes Associated With the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States.
Sun Shengzhi S Savitz David A DA Wellenius Gregory A GA
JAMA network open 20211001 10
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveOur objective was to assess differences in pregnancy outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the previous year.Study designIn a cross-sectional study of delivery hospitalizations in the Premier Healthcare Database Special COVID-19 Release, we assessed differences in selected maternal and pregnancy outcomes occurring April-December in 2019 and 2020 in the United States.ResultAmong 663,620 deliveries occurring in 2019 and 614,093 deliveries occurring in 2020, we observed an increase in in-hospital maternal death from 2019 to 2020, which was no longer statistically significant after excluding deliveries with a COVID-19 diagnosis. Intensive care unit admission and preterm birth decreased from 2019 to 2020. There was no difference in the prevalence of most other outcomes examined.ConclusionThe full impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on maternal and pregnancy outcomes remains to be understood. Most outcomes investigated experienced minimal change from 2019 to 2020.
| S-EPMC8852860 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on adverse perinatal outcomes remains unclear.ObjectiveThis study aimed to investigate whether COVID-19 is associated with adverse perinatal outcomes in a large national dataset and to examine the rates of adverse outcomes during the pandemic compared with the rates of adverse outcomes during the prepandemic period.Study designThis observational cohort study included 683,905 patients, between the ages of 12 and 50, hospitalized for childbirth and abortion between January 1, 2019, and May 31, 2021. During the prepandemic period, 271,444 women were hospitalized for childbirth. During the pandemic, 308,532 women were hospitalized for childbirth, and 2708 women had COVID-19. The associations between COVID-19 and inhospital adverse perinatal outcomes were examined using propensity score-adjusted logistic regression.ResultsWomen with COVID-19 were more likely to experience both early and late preterm birth (adjusted odds ratios, 1.38 [95% confidence interval, 1.1-1.7] and 1.62 [95% confidence interval, 1.3-1.7], respectively), preeclampsia (adjusted odds ratio, 1.2 [95% confidence interval, 1.0-1.4]), disseminated intravascular coagulopathy (adjusted odds ratio, 1.57 [95% confidence interval, 1.1-2.2]), pulmonary edema (adjusted odds ratio, 2.7 [95% confidence interval, 1.1-6.3]), and need for mechanical ventilation (adjusted odds ratio, 8.1 [95% confidence interval, 3.8-17.3]) than women without COVID-19. There was no significant difference in the prevalence of stillbirth among women with COVID-19 (16/2708) and women without COVID-19 (174/39,562) (P=.257). There was no difference in adverse outcomes among women who delivered during the pandemic vs prepandemic period. Combined inhospital mortality was significantly higher for women with COVID-19 (147 [95% confidence interval, 3.0-292.0] vs 2.5 [95% confidence interval, 0.0-7.5] deaths per 100,000 women). Women diagnosed with COVID-19 within 30 days before hospitalization were more likely to experience early preterm birth, placental abruption, and mechanical ventilation than women diagnosed with COVID-19 >30 days before hospitalization for childbirth (4.0% vs 2.4% for early preterm birth [adjusted odds ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-2.7]; 2.2% vs 1.2% for placental abruption [adjusted odds ratio, 1.86; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-3.4]; and 0.9% vs 0.1% for mechanical ventilation [adjusted odds ratio, 13.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.8-107.2]).ConclusionWomen with COVID-19 had a higher prevalence of adverse perinatal outcomes and increased in-hospital mortality, with the highest risk occurring when the diagnosis was within 30 days of hospitalization, raising the possibility of a high-risk period.
| S-EPMC8805913 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Since its declaration as a global pandemic on March11th 2020, COVID-19 has had a significant effect on solid-organ transplantation. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of COVID-19 on Liver transplantation (LT) in United States.Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the United Network for Organ Sharing database regarding characteristics of donors, adult-LT recipients, and transplant outcomes during early-COVID period (March 11- September 11, 2020) and compared them to pre-COVID period (March 11 - September 11, 2019).Results: Overall, 4% fewer LTs were performed during early-COVID period (4107 vs 4277). Compared to pre-COVID period, transplants performed in early-COVID period were associated with: increase in alcoholic liver disease as most common primary diagnosis (1315 vs 1187, P< 0.01), higher MELD score in the recipients (25 vs 23, P<0.01), lower time on wait-list (52 vs 84 days, P<0.01), higher need for hemodialysis at transplant (9.4 vs 11.1%, P=0.012), longer distance from recipient hospital (131 vs 64 miles, P<0.01) and higher donor risk index (1.65 vs 1.55, P<0.01). Early-COVID period saw increase in rejection episodes before discharge (4.6 vs 3.4%, P=0.023) and lower 90-day graft/patient survival (90.2 vs 95.1 %, P<0.01; 92.2 vs 96.5 %, P<0.01). In multivariable cox-regression analysis, early-COVID period was the independent risk factor for graft failure at 90-days post-transplant (Hazard Ratio 1.77, P<0.01).Conclusions: During early-COVID period in United States, overall LT decreased, alcoholic liver disease was primary diagnosis for LT, rate of rejection episodes before discharge was higher and 90-days post-transplant graft survival was lower.
| S-EPMC9110062 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe purpose of this study was to assess colorectal surgery outcomes, discharge destination, and readmission in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsAdult colorectal surgery patients in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2019-2020) and its colectomy and proctectomy procedure-targeted files were included. The prepandemic time period was defined from April 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019. The pandemic time period was defined from April 1, 2020 to December 31, 2020 in quarterly intervals (Q2 April-June; Q3 July-September; Q4 October-December). Factors associated with morbidity and in-hospital mortality were assessed using multivariable logistic regression.ResultsAmong 62,393 patients, 34,810 patients (55.8%) underwent colorectal surgery prepandemic and 27,583 (44.2%) during the pandemic. Patients who had surgery during the pandemic had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists class and presented more frequently with dependent functional status. The proportion of emergent surgeries increased (12.7% prepandemic versus 15.2% pandemic, P < 0.001), with less laparoscopic cases (54.0% versus 51.0%, P < 0.001). Higher rates of morbidity with a greater proportion of discharges to home and lesser proportion of discharges to skilled care facilities were observed with no considerable differences in length of stay or worsening readmission rates. Multivariable analysis demonstrated increased odds of overall and serious morbidity and in-hospital mortality, during Q3 and/or Q4 of the 2020 pandemic.ConclusionsDifferences in hospital presentation, inpatient care, and discharge disposition of colorectal surgery patients were observed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Pandemic responses should emphasize balancing resource allocation, educating patients and providers on timely medical workup and management, and optimizing discharge coordination pathways.
| S-EPMC9868386 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10669814 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives:The paper highlights US health policy and technology responses to the COVID-19 pandemic from January 1, 2020 - August 9, 2020. Methods:A review of primary data sources in the US was conducted. The data were summarized to describe national and state-level trends in the spread of COVID-19 and in policy and technology solutions. Results:COVID-19 cases and deaths initially peaked in late March and April, but after a brief reduction in June cases and deaths began rising again July and continued to climb into early August. The US policy response is best characterized by its federalist, decentralized nature. The national government has led in terms of economic and fiscal response, increasing funding for scientific research into testing, treatment, and vaccines, and in creating more favorable regulations for the use of telemedicine. State governments have been responsible for many of the containment, testing, and treatment responses, often with little federal government support. Policies that favor economic re-opening are often followed by increases in state-level case numbers, which are then followed by stricter containment measures, such as mask wearing or pausing re-opening plans. Conclusions:While all US states have begun to "re-open" economic activities, this trend appears to be largely driven by social tensions and economic motivations than an ability to effectively test and surveil populations.
| S-EPMC7451131 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsTo examine changes in drinking behavior among United States (US) adults between March 10 and July 21, 2020, a critical period during the COVID-19 pandemic.DesignLongitudinal, internet-based panel survey.SettingThe Understanding America Study (UAS), a nationally representative panel of US adults age 18 or older.ParticipantsA total of 4298 US adults who reported alcohol use.MeasurementsChanges in number of reported drinking days from March 11, 2020 through July 21, 2020 in the overall sample and stratified by sex, age, race/ethnicity, household structure, poverty status, and census region.FindingsCompared with March 11, the number of drinking days per week was significantly higher on April 1 by an average of 0.36 days (95% CI = 0.30, 0.43), on May 1 by an average of 0.55 days (95% CI = 0.47, 0.63), on June 1 by an average of 0.41 days (95% CI = 0.33, 0.49), and on July 1 by an average of 0.39 days (95% CI = 0.31, 0.48). Males, White participants, and older adults reported sustained increases in drinking days, whereas female participants and individuals living under the federal poverty line had attenuated drinking days in the latter part of the study period.ConclusionsBetween March and mid-July 2020, adults in the United States reported increases in the number of drinking days, with sustained increases observed among males, White participants, and older adults.
| S-EPMC8441933 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8379559 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In the social upheaval arising from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, we do not yet know how union formation, particularly marriage, has been affected. Using administration records-marriage certificates and applications-gathered from settings representing a variety of COVID-19 experiences in the United States, the authors compare counts of recorded marriages in 2020 against those from the same period in 2019. There is a dramatic decrease in year-to-date cumulative marriages in 2020 compared with 2019 in each case. Similar patterns are observed for the Seattle metropolitan area when analyzing the cumulative number of marriage applications, a leading indicator of marriages in the near future. Year-to-date declines in marriage are unlikely to be due solely to closure of government agencies that administer marriage certification or reporting delays. Together, these findings suggest that marriage has declined during the COVID-19 outbreak and may continue to do so, at least in the short term.
| S-EPMC7780066 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic significantly changed society. We aimed to examine the systematic impact of the COVID-19 on injury burden in the United States.MethodsWe extracted mortality and morbidity data from CDC WONDER and WISQARS. We estimated age-standardized injury mortality rate ratio and morbidity rate ratio (MtRR and MbRR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for all injuries, all unintentional injuries, homicide/assault by all methods, suicide/self-harm by all methods, as well as other 11 specific unintentional or intentional injury categories. Injury rate ratios were compared for 2020 vs. 2019 to those of 2019 vs. 2018 to demonstrate the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on fatal and nonfatal injury burden. The ratio of MtRRs (RMtRR) and the ratio of MbRRs (RMbRR) with 95% CI between 2020 vs. 2019 and 2019 vs. 2018 were calculated separately.ResultsThe COVID-19 pandemic was associated with an increase in injury mortality (RMtRR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.11, 1.13) but injury morbidity decreased (RMbRR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.88, 0.89) when the changes of these rates from 2019 to 2020 were compared to those from 2018 to 2019. Mortality disparities between the two time periods were primarily driven by greater mortality during the COVID-influenced 2020 vs. 2019 from road traffic crashes (particularly motorcyclist mortality), drug poisoning, and homicide by firearm. Similar patterns were not present from 2019 vs. 2018. There were morbidity reductions from road traffic crashes (particularly occupant and pedestrian morbidity from motor vehicle crashes), unintentional falls, and self-harm by suffocation from 2019 to 2020 compared to the previous period. Change patterns in sexes and age groups were generally similar, but exceptions were observed for some injury types.ConclusionsThe COVID-19 pandemic significantly changed specific injury burden in the United States. Some discrepancies also existed across sex and age groups, meriting attention of injury researchers and policymakers to tailor injury prevention strategies to particular populations and the environmental contexts citizens face.
| S-EPMC9666887 | biostudies-literature