Dataset Information

Planned early delivery for late preterm pre-eclampsia in a low- and middle-income setting: a feasibility study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Pre-eclampsia is a leading cause of maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity globally. Planned delivery between 34⁺⁰ and 36⁺⁶ weeks may reduce adverse pregnancy outcomes but is yet to be evaluated in a low and middle-income setting. Prior to designing a randomised controlled trial to evaluate this in India and Zambia, we carried out a 6-month feasibility study in order to better understand the proposed trial environment and guide development of our intervention.

Methods

We used mixed methods to understand the disease burden and current management of pre-eclampsia at our proposed trial sites and explore the acceptability of the intervention. We undertook a case notes review of women with pre-eclampsia who delivered at the proposed trial sites over a 3-month period, alongside facilitating focus group discussions with women and partners and conducting semi-structured interviews with healthcare providers. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse audit data. A thematic framework analysis was used for qualitative data.

Results

Case notes data (n = 326) showed that in our settings, 19.5% (n = 44) of women with pre-eclampsia delivering beyond 34 weeks experienced an adverse outcome. In women delivering between 34⁺⁰ and 36⁺⁶ weeks, there were similar numbers of antenatal stillbirths [n = 3 (3.3%)] and neonatal deaths [n = 3 (3.4%)]; median infant birthweight was 2.2 kg and 1.9 kg in Zambia and India respectively. Lived experience of women and healthcare providers was an important facilitator to the proposed intervention, highlighting the serious consequences of pre-eclampsia. A preference for spontaneous labour and limited neonatal resources were identified as potential barriers.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated a clear need to evaluate the intervention and highlighted several challenges relating to trial context that enabled us to adapt our protocol and design an acceptable intervention. Our study demonstrates the importance of assessing feasibility when developing complex interventions, particularly in a low-resource setting. Additionally, it provides a unique insight into the management of pre-eclampsia at our trial settings and an understanding of the knowledge, attitudes and beliefs underpinning the acceptability of planned early delivery.

SUBMITTER: Beardmore-Gray A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8173959 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn women with late preterm pre-eclampsia, the optimal time to initiate delivery is unclear because limitation of maternal disease progression needs to be balanced against infant complications. The aim of this trial was to determine whether planned earlier initiation of delivery reduces maternal adverse outcomes without substantial worsening of neonatal or infant outcomes, compared with expectant management (usual care) in women with late preterm pre-eclampsia.MethodsIn this parallel-group, non-masked, multicentre, randomised controlled trial done in 46 maternity units across England and Wales, we compared planned delivery versus expectant management (usual care) with individual randomisation in women with late preterm pre-eclampsia from 34 to less than 37 weeks' gestation and a singleton or dichorionic diamniotic twin pregnancy. The co-primary maternal outcome was a composite of maternal morbidity or recorded systolic blood pressure of at least 160 mm Hg with a superiority hypothesis. The co-primary perinatal outcome was a composite of perinatal deaths or neonatal unit admission up to infant hospital discharge with a non-inferiority hypothesis (non-inferiority margin of 10% difference in incidence). Analyses were by intention to treat, together with a per-protocol analysis for the perinatal outcome. The trial was prospectively registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN01879376. The trial is closed to recruitment but follow-up is ongoing.FindingsBetween Sept 29, 2014, and Dec 10, 2018, 901 women were recruited. 450 women (448 women and 471 infants analysed) were allocated to planned delivery and 451 women (451 women and 475 infants analysed) to expectant management. The incidence of the co-primary maternal outcome was significantly lower in the planned delivery group (289 [65%] women) compared with the expectant management group (338 [75%] women; adjusted relative risk 0·86, 95% CI 0·79-0·94; p=0·0005). The incidence of the co-primary perinatal outcome by intention to treat was significantly higher in the planned delivery group (196 [42%] infants) compared with the expectant management group (159 [34%] infants; 1·26, 1·08-1·47; p=0·0034). The results from the per-protocol analysis were similar. There were nine serious adverse events in the planned delivery group and 12 in the expectant management group.InterpretationThere is strong evidence to suggest that planned delivery reduces maternal morbidity and severe hypertension compared with expectant management, with more neonatal unit admissions related to prematurity but no indicators of greater neonatal morbidity. This trade-off should be discussed with women with late preterm pre-eclampsia to allow shared decision making on timing of delivery.FundingNational Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Project description:BackgroundPre-eclampsia is a pregnancy disorder, characterised by hypertension and multisystem complications in the mother. The adverse outcomes of pre-eclampsia include severe hypertension, stroke, renal and hepatic injury, haemorrhage, fetal growth restriction and even death. The optimal time to instigate delivery to prevent morbidity when pre-eclampsia occurs between 34 and 37?weeks' gestation, without increasing problems related to infant immaturity or complications, remains unclear.Methods/designThe PHOENIX trial is a non-masked, randomised controlled trial, comparing planned early delivery (with initiation of delivery within 48?h of randomisation) with usual care (expectant management) in women with pre-eclampsia between 34+?0 and 36+?6 weeks' gestation. The primary objectives of the trial are to determine if planned delivery reduces adverse maternal outcomes, without increasing the short-term harm to infants (composite of perinatal deaths or neonatal unit admissions up to infant hospital discharge) or impacting long-term infant neurodevelopmental status at 2 years corrected age (Parent Report of Cognitive Abilities-Revised).DiscussionCurrent practice in the UK at the time of trial commencement for management of pre-eclampsia varies by gestation. Previous trials have shown that in women with pre-eclampsia after 37?weeks of gestion, delivery is initiated, as maternal complications are reduced without increasing fetal risks. Prior to 34?weeks of gestation, usual management aims to prolong pregnancy for fetal benefit, unless severe complications occur, necessitating preterm delivery. This trial aims to address the uncertainty for women where the balance of benefits and risks of delivery compared to expectant management are uncertain. Previous trials in this area have been undertaken, but have not provided a definitive answer, and the research question remains active. The results of this trial are expected to influence clinical practice internationally, through direct adoption and by incorporation into guidelines in countries with similar settings.Trial registrationISRCTN01879376 . Registered on 25 November 2013.

Project description:BackgroundPre-eclampsia is a pregnancy complication characterised by high blood pressure and multi-organ dysfunction in the mother. It is a leading contributor to maternal and perinatal mortality, with 99% of these deaths occurring in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Whilst clear guidelines exist for management of early-onset (< 34 weeks) and term (≥ 37 weeks) disease, the optimal timing of delivery in pre-eclampsia between 34+ 0 and 36+ 6 weeks is less clear. In a high-income setting, delivery may improve maternal outcomes without detriment to the baby, but this intervention is yet to be evaluated in LMIC.MethodsThe CRADLE-4 Trial is a non-masked, randomised controlled trial comparing planned early delivery (initiation of delivery within 48 h of randomisation) with routine care (expectant management) in women with pre-eclampsia between 34+ 0 and 36+ 6 weeks' gestation in India and Zambia. The primary objective is to establish whether a policy of planned early delivery can reduce adverse maternal outcomes, without increasing severe neonatal morbidity.DiscussionThe World Health Organization recommends delivery for all women with pre-eclampsia from 37 weeks onwards, based on evidence showing clear maternal benefit without increased neonatal risk. Before 34 weeks, watchful waiting is preferred, with delivery recommended only when there is severe maternal or fetal compromise, due to the neonatal risks associated with early preterm delivery. Currently, there is a lack of guidance for clinicians managing women with pre-eclampsia between 34+ 0 and 36+ 6 weeks. Early delivery benefits the mother but may increase the need for neonatal unit admission in the infant (albeit without serious morbidity at this gestation). On the other hand, waiting to deliver may increase the risk of stillbirth, fetal growth restriction and hypoxic brain injury in the neonate as a result of severe maternal complications. This is especially true for LMIC where there is a higher prevalence of adverse events. The balance of risks and benefits therefore needs to be carefully assessed before making firm recommendations. This is the first trial evaluating the optimal timing of delivery in pre-eclampsia in LMIC, where resources and disease burden are considerably different.Trial registrationISRCTN 10672137 . Registered on 28 November 2019.

Project description:IntroductionPre-eclampsia affects ~5%-7% of pregnancies. Although improved obstetric care has significantly diminished its associated maternal mortality, it remains a leading cause of maternal morbidity and mortality in the world. Term pre-eclampsia accounts for 70% of all cases and a large proportion of maternal-fetal morbidity related to this condition. Unlike in preterm pre-eclampsia, the prediction and prevention of term pre-eclampsia remain unsolved. Previously proposed approaches are based on combined third-trimester screening and/or prophylactic drugs, but these policies are unlikely to be widely implementable in many world settings. Recent evidence shows that the soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 (s-Flt-1) to placental growth factor (PlGF) ratio measured at 35-37 weeks' gestation predicts term pre-eclampsia with an 80% detection rate. Likewise, recent studies demonstrate that induction of labour beyond 37 weeks is safe and well accepted by women. We hypothesise that a single-step universal screening for term pre-eclampsia based on sFlt1/PlGF ratio at 35-37 weeks followed by planned delivery beyond 37 weeks reduces the prevalence of term pre-eclampsia without increasing the caesarean section rates or worsening the neonatal outcomes.Methods and analysisWe propose an open-label randomised clinical trial to evaluate the impact of a screening of term pre-eclampsia with the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio followed by planned delivery in asymptomatic nulliparous women at 35-37 weeks. Women will be assigned 1:1 to revealed (sFlt-1/PlGF known to clinicians) versus concealed (unknown) arms. A cut-off of >90th centile is used to define the high risk of subsequent pre-eclampsia and offer planned delivery from 37 weeks. The efficacy variables will be analysed and compared between groups primarily following an intention-to-treat approach, by ORs and their 95% CI. This value will be computed using a Generalised Linear Mixed Model for binary response (study group as fixed effect and the centre as intercept random effect).Ethics and disseminationThe study is conducted under the principles of Good Clinical Practice. This study was accepted by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of Hospital Clinic Barcelona on 20 November 2020. Subsequent approval by individual ethical committees and competent authorities was granted. The study results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated at international conferences.Trial registration numberNCT04766866.

Project description:ObjectivesPreterm birth (PTB) is a major public health problem worldwide. It can occur spontaneously or be medically indicated for obstetric complications, such as pre-eclampsia (PE) or fetal growth restriction. The main objective of this study was to investigate whether there is a shared uteroplacental etiology in the first trimester of pregnancy across PTB subtypes.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of singleton pregnancies that underwent screening for preterm PE as part of their routine first-trimester ultrasound assessment at a tertiary center in London, UK, between March 2018 and December 2020. Screening for preterm PE was performed using the Fetal Medicine Foundation algorithm, which includes maternal factors, mean arterial pressure (MAP), uterine artery pulsatility index (UtA-PI) and pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A). Women with a risk of ≥ 1 in 50 for preterm PE were classified as high risk and offered prophylactic aspirin (150 mg once a day) and serial ultrasound assessments. The following delivery outcomes were evaluated: PTB < 37 weeks, iatrogenic PTB (iPTB) and spontaneous PTB (sPTB). Logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the association of PTB, iPTB and sPTB with an increased risk of preterm PE. A model for prediction of PTB < 37 weeks and < 33 weeks was developed and its performance was compared with that of an existing model in the literature.ResultsA total of 11 437 women were included in the study, of whom 475 (4.2%) had PTB. Of these, 308 (64.8%) were sPTB and 167 (35.2%) were iPTB. Patients with PTB had a higher body mass index, were more likely to be of black or Asian ethnicity, be smokers, have pregestational hypertension or diabetes, or have a history of previous PTB. They also had higher MAP (87.7 vs 86.0 mmHg, P < 0.0001), higher UtA-PI multiples of the median (MoM) (0.99 vs 0.92, P < 0.0001) and lower PAPP-A MoM (0.89 vs 1.08, P < 0.0001) compared to women with a term birth. In women at high risk of PE, the odds ratio for iPTB was 6.0 (95% CI, 4.29-8.43; P < 0.0001) and that for sPTB was 2.0 (95% CI, 1.46-2.86; P < 0.0001). A prediction model for PTB < 37 weeks and < 33 weeks, developed based on this cohort, included previous PTB, black ethnicity, chronic hypertension, diabetes mellitus, PAPP-A MoM and UtA-PI MoM. The performance of the model was similar to that of an existing first-trimester prediction model for PTB < 33 weeks (area under the curve, 0.704 (95% CI, 0.653-0.754) vs 0.694 (95% CI, 0.643-0.746)).ConclusionsIncreased first-trimester risk for uteroplacental dysfunction was associated with both iPTB and sPTB, implying a shared etiological pathway. The same factors used to predict PE risk show acceptable discrimination to predict PTB at < 33 weeks. Women at high risk of uteroplacental dysfunction may warrant additional monitoring and management for an increased risk of sPTB. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the feasibility of conducting a randomised placebo-controlled trial of corticosteroids prior to planned caesarean section from 35+0 to 39+6 weeks.DesignA triple-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel, trial randomised at the participant level (1:1 ratio). Additional feasibility data obtained by questionnaires from trial participants and women who declined trial participation, and focus groups with local site researchers and clinicians.SettingThree obstetric units in New Zealand including tertiary and secondary care; public and private care, and research active and non-active units.ParticipantsWomen undergoing a planned caesarean section from 35+0 to 39+6 weeks; local site researchers and clinicians.InterventionsTwo doses of 11.4 mg betamethasone or saline placebo. Questionnaires and focus group meetings.Primary and secondary outcome measuresPrimary outcome: trial recruitment rate of eligible women.Secondary outcomestrial recruitment by gestational age, site and delivery indication; proportion of babies who completed measurements of blood glucose concentrations as per protocol; overall incidence neonatal respiratory distress requiring >60 min of respiratory support; overall incidence of neonatal hypoglycaemia, and barriers and enablers to trial participation by participants, researchers and clinicians.ResultsThe recruitment rate was 8.9% (88/987) overall and 11.2% (88/789) for those approached about the trial. Neonatal blood glucose concentrations were measured as per protocol in 87/92 (94.6%) babies. For potential participants, key enablers to participation were contributing to research, a feeling of relevance and a good understanding; key barriers were a lack of understanding and concerns over safety. For researchers and clinicians, themes representing enablers and barriers included relevance, communication and awareness, influences on women's decision-making, resource challenges and trial process practicalities.ConclusionsSome women are willing to participate in a randomised placebo-controlled trial of corticosteroids prior to a planned caesarean section birth at late preterm and term gestations. Participation in such a trial can be enhanced.