Background The frequency of planned out-of-hospital birth in the United States has increased in recent years. The value of studies assessing the perinatal risks of planned out-of-hospital birth versus hospital birth has been limited by cases in which transfer to a hospital is required and a birth that was initially planned as an out-of-hospital birth is misclassified as a hospital birth. Methods We performed a population-based, retrospective cohort study of all births that occurred in Oregon during 2012 and 2013 using data from newly revised Oregon birth certificates that allowed for the disaggregation of hospital births into the categories of planned in-hospital births and planned out-of-hospital births that took place in the hospital after a woman’s intrapartum transfer to the hospital. We assessed perinatal morbidity and mortality, maternal morbidity, and obstetrical procedures according to the planned birth setting (out of hospital vs. hospital). Results Planned out-of-hospital birth was associated with a higher rate of perinatal death than was planned in-hospital birth (3.9 vs. 1.8 deaths per 1000 deliveries, P = 0.003; odds ratio after adjustment for maternal characteristics and medical conditions, 2.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.37 to 4.30; adjusted risk difference, 1.52 deaths per 1000 births; 95% CI, 0.51 to 2.54). The odds for neonatal seizure were higher and the odds for admission to a neonatal intensive care unit lower with planned out-of-hospital births than with planned in-hospital birth. Planned out-of-hospital birth was also strongly associated with unassisted vaginal delivery (93.8%, vs. 71.9% with planned in-hospital births; P<0.001) and with decreased odds for obstetrical procedures. Conclusions Perinatal mortality was higher with planned out-of-hospital birth than with planned in-hospital birth, but the absolute risk of death was low in both settings. (Funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.)

Objective To conduct a cost minimisation analysis of three methods of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) screening and diagnosis.Design Prospective randomised controlled trial.Setting University teaching hospital.Population Pregnant women (n = 1594) presenting for GDM screening.Methods Women presenting for GDM screening, who consented to participate, were randomised to GR1 [1-hour, 50-g glucose screen (GS) ± 3-hour, 100-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT)], GR2 (50-g GS ± 2-hour, 75-g OGTT) or GR3 (2-hour, 75-g OGTT). Demographics, health and time/travel cost information were assessed for each glucose testing visit.Main outcome measures Costs (direct and indirect) and prevalence of GDM diagnosis.Results The direct sampling costs of the glucose tests per woman were as follows: GS, CAN$12.57; 75-g OGTT, $36.10; 100-g OGTT, CAN$48.13. Among women in the two-step method groups diagnosed with GDM, 39% of the GR1 and 61% of the GR2 groups were diagnosed at the first step by GS ‡ 10.3 mmol/l, according to the Canadian Diabetes Association recommendations, contributing to a lower total cost in these groups. The total costs per woman screened were as follows: GR1, CAN$91.61; GR2, CAN$89.03; GR3, CAN$108.38. The GDM prevalence was similar (3.7%, 3.7% and 3.6%, respectively). The higher costs of GR3 were related to more blood draws and the time required for all women to undergo the 2-hour OGTT.Conclusions Careful consideration should be given to an internationally recommended method of universal screening for GDM which minimises the burden and cost for individual women and the healthcare system, yet provides diagnostic efficacy. The two-step method (GS ± OGTT) accomplished this better than the one-step method (75-g OGTT).Keywords Cost analysis, diagnosis, direct/indirect costs, gestational diabetes mellitus, oral glucose tolerance test, screening.Please cite this paper as: Meltzer S, Snyder J, Penrod J, Nudi M, Morin L. Gestational diabetes mellitus screening and diagnosis: a prospective randomised controlled trial comparing costs of one-step and two-step methods. BJOG 2010;117:407-415.

OBJECTIVE To describe the prevalence of serious maternal complications following early preterm birth by gestational age (GA), delivery route and type of cesarean incision. STUDY DESIGN Trained personnel abstracted data from maternal and neonatal charts for all deliveries on randomly selected days representing 1/3 of deliveries across 25 US hospitals over 3 years (n=115,502). All women delivering non-anomalous singletons between 23 and 33 weeks’ gestation were included. Women were excluded for antepartum stillbirth and highly morbid conditions for which route of delivery would not likely impact morbidity including non-reassuring fetal status, cord prolapse, placenta previa, placenta accreta, placental abruption, and severe, unstable maternal conditions (cardiopulmonary collapse, acute respiratory distress syndrome, seizures). Serious maternal complications were defined as: hemorrhage (blood loss ≥1500 mL, blood transfusion, or hysterectomy for hemorrhage); infection (endometritis, wound dehiscence, or wound infection requiring antibiotics, reopening or unexpected procedure); ICU admission; or death. Delivery route was categorized as classical cesarean delivery (CCD), low transverse cesarean delivery (LTCD), low vertical cesarean delivery (LVCD), and vaginal delivery (VD). Association of delivery route with complications was estimated using multivariable regression models yielding adjusted relative risks (aRR) controlling for maternal age, race, body mass index, hypertension, diabetes, preterm premature rupture of membranes, preterm labor, GA, and hospital of delivery. RESULTS Of 2659 women who met criteria for inclusion in this analysis, 8.6% of women experienced serious maternal complications. Complications were associated with GA and were highest between 23–27 weeks of gestation. The frequency of complications was associated with delivery route; compared with 3.5% of SVD, 23.0% of CCD (aRR 3.54, 95%CI 2.29–5.48), 12.1% of LTCD (aRR 2.59, 95%CI 1.77–3.77), and 10.3% of LVCD (aRR 2.27, 95%CI 0.68–7.55) experienced complications. There was no significant difference in complication rates between CCD and LTCD (aRR 1.37, 95%CI 0.95–1.97) or between CCD and LVCD (aRR 1.56, 95%CI 0.48–5.07). CONCLUSION The risk of maternal complications after early preterm delivery is substantial, particularly in women who undergo cesarean delivery. Obstetricians need to be prepared to manage potential hemorrhage, infection and ICU admission for early preterm births requiring cesarean delivery.

Background Cesarean delivery in the second stage of labor is common, whereas the frequency of operative vaginal delivery has been declining. However, data comparing outcomes for attempted operative vaginal delivery in the second stage versus cesarean in the second stage are scant. Previous studies that examine operative vaginal delivery have compared it to a baseline risk of complications from a spontaneous vaginal delivery and cesarean delivery. However, when a woman has a need for intervention in the second stage, spontaneous vaginal delivery is not an option she or the provider can choose. Thus, the appropriate clinical comparison is cesarean versus operative vaginal delivery. Objective Our objective was to compare outcomes by the first attempted operative delivery (vacuum, forceps versus cesarean delivery) in patients needing second stage assistance at a fetal station of +2 or below. Study Design Secondary analysis of an observational obstetric cohort in 25 academically-affiliated U.S. hospitals over a three-year period. A subset of ≥37 weeks, non-anomalous, vertex, singletons, with no prior vaginal delivery who reached a station of +2 or below and underwent an attempt at an operative delivery were included. Indications included for operative delivery were: failure to descend, non-reassuring fetal status, labor dystocia or maternal exhaustion. The primary outcomes included a composite neonatal outcome (death, fracture, length of stay ≥3 days beyond mother’s, low Apgar, subgaleal hemorrhage, ventilator support, hypoxic encephalopathy, brachial plexus injury, facial nerve palsy) and individual maternal outcomes (postpartum hemorrhage, third and fourth degree tears [severe lacerations], and postpartum infection). Outcomes were examined by the three attempted modes of delivery. Odds ratios were calculated for primary outcomes adjusting for confounders. Final mode of delivery was quantified. Results 2531 women met inclusion criteria. Vacuum attempt was associated with the lowest frequency of the neonatal composite (4.2% vs. 6.1% vaginal forceps vs. 6.9% cesarean) and maternal complications (Postpartum infection 0.2% vs. 0.9% forceps vs. 5.3% cesarean, Postpartum hemmorhage 1.4% vs. 2.8% forceps vs. 3.8% cesarean), except for severe lacerations (19.1% vs. 33.8% forceps vs. 0% cesarean). When confounders were taken into account, both forceps (odds ratio 0.16, 95%CI 0.05-0.49) and vacuum (odds ratio 0.04, 95%CI 0.01-0.17) were associated with a significantly lower odds of Post partuminfection. The neonatal composite and Postpartum hemmorhage were not significantly different between modes of attempted delivery. Cesarean occurred in 6.4% and 4.4% of attempted vacuum and forceps groups (P=.04). Conclusion In patients needing second stage delivery assistance with a station of +2 or below, attempted operative vaginal delivery was associated with a lower frequency of Postpartum infection, but higher frequency of severe lacerations.

Background-The frequency of planned out-of-hospital birth in the United States has increased in recent years. The value of studies assessing the perinatal risks of planned out-of-hospital birth versus hospital birth has been limited by cases in which transfer to a hospital is required and a birth that was initially planned as an out-of-hospital birth is misclassified as a hospital birth.