Browsing by Author "Bauserman, Melissa"
Now showing 1 - 10 of 20
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Azithromycin to Prevent Sepsis or Death in Women Planning a Vaginal Birth(Massachusetts Medical Society, 2023) Tita, Alan T. N.; Carlo, Waldemar A.; McClure, Elizabeth M.; Mwenechanya, Musaku; Chomba, Elwyn; Hemingway-Foday, Jennifer J.; Kavi, Avinash; Metgud, Mrityunjay C.; Goudar, Shivaprasad S.; Derman, Richard; Lokangaka, Adrien; Tshefu, Antoinette; Bauserman, Melissa; Bose, Carl; Shivkumar, Poonam; Waikar, Manju; Patel, Archana; Hibberd, Patricia L.; Nyongesa, Paul; Esamai, Fabian; Ekhaguere, Osayame A.; Bucher, Sherri; Jessani, Saleem; Tikmani, Shiyam S.; Saleem, Sarah; Goldenberg, Robert L.; Billah, Sk M.; Lennox, Ruth; Haque, Rashidul; Petri, William; Figueroa, Lester; Mazariegos, Manolo; Krebs, Nancy F.; Moore, Janet L.; Nolen, Tracy L.; Koso-Thomas, Marion; A-PLUS Trial Group; Pediatrics, School of MedicineBackground: The use of azithromycin reduces maternal infection in women during unplanned cesarean delivery, but its effect on those with planned vaginal delivery is unknown. Data are needed on whether an intrapartum oral dose of azithromycin would reduce maternal and offspring sepsis or death. Methods: In this multicountry, placebo-controlled, randomized trial, we assigned women who were in labor at 28 weeks' gestation or more and who were planning a vaginal delivery to receive a single 2-g oral dose of azithromycin or placebo. The two primary outcomes were a composite of maternal sepsis or death and a composite of stillbirth or neonatal death or sepsis. During an interim analysis, the data and safety monitoring committee recommended stopping the trial for maternal benefit. Results: A total of 29,278 women underwent randomization. The incidence of maternal sepsis or death was lower in the azithromycin group than in the placebo group (1.6% vs. 2.4%), with a relative risk of 0.67 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56 to 0.79; P<0.001), but the incidence of stillbirth or neonatal death or sepsis was similar (10.5% vs. 10.3%), with a relative risk of 1.02 (95% CI, 0.95 to 1.09; P = 0.56). The difference in the maternal primary outcome appeared to be driven mainly by the incidence of sepsis (1.5% in the azithromycin group and 2.3% in the placebo group), with a relative risk of 0.65 (95% CI, 0.55 to 0.77); the incidence of death from any cause was 0.1% in the two groups (relative risk, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.51 to 2.97). Neonatal sepsis occurred in 9.8% and 9.6% of the infants, respectively (relative risk, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.10). The incidence of stillbirth was 0.4% in the two groups (relative risk, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.53); neonatal death within 4 weeks after birth occurred in 1.5% in both groups (relative risk, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.24). Azithromycin was not associated with a higher incidence in adverse events. Conclusions: Among women planning a vaginal delivery, a single oral dose of azithromycin resulted in a significantly lower risk of maternal sepsis or death than placebo but had little effect on newborn sepsis or death.Item Can the date of last menstrual period be trusted in the first trimester? Comparisons of gestational age measures from a prospective cohort study in six low-income to middle-income countries(BMJ, 2023-09-20) Patel, Archana; Bann, Carla M.; Thorsten, Vanessa R.; Rao, Sowmya R.; Lokangaka, Adrien; Tshefu Kitoto, Antoinette; Bauserman, Melissa; Figueroa, Lester; Krebs, Nancy F.; Esamai, Fabian; Bucher, Sherri; Saleem, Sarah; Goldenberg, Robert L.; Chomba, Elwyn; Carlo, Waldemar A.; Goudar, Shivaprasad; Derman, Richard; Koso-Thomas, Marion; McClure, Elizabeth; Hibberd, Patricia L.; Pediatrics, School of MedicineObjectives: We examined gestational age (GA) estimates for live and still births, and prematurity rates based on last menstrual period (LMP) compared with ultrasonography (USG) among pregnant women at seven sites in six low-resource countries. Design: Prospective cohort study SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This study included data from the Global Network's population-based Maternal and Newborn Health Registry which follows pregnant women in six low-income and middle-income countries (Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guatemala, India, Kenya, Pakistan and Zambia). Participants in this analysis were 42 803 women, including their 43 230 babies, who registered for the study in their first trimester based on GA estimated either by LMP or USG and had a live or stillbirth with an estimated GA of 20-42 weeks. Outcome measures: GA was estimated in weeks and days based on LMP and/or USG. Prematurity was defined as GA of 20 weeks+0 days through 36 weeks+6 days, calculated by both USG and LMP. Results: Overall, average GA varied ≤1 week between LMP and USG. Mean GA for live births by LMP was lower than by USG (adjusted mean difference (95% CI) = -0.23 (-0.29 to -0.17) weeks). Among stillbirths, a higher GA was estimated by LMP than USG (adjusted mean difference (95% CI)= 0.42 (0.11 to 0.72) weeks). Preterm birth rates for live births were significantly higher when dated by LMP (adjusted rate difference (95% CI)= 4.20 (3.56 to 4.85)). There was no significant difference in preterm birth rates for stillbirths. Conclusion: The small differences in GA for LMP versus USG in the Guatemalan and Indian sites suggest that LMP may be a useful alternative to USG for GA dating during the first trimester until availability of USG improves in those areas. Further research is needed to assess LMP for first-trimester GA dating in other regions with limited access to USG.Item Corrigendum to The impact of risk factors on aspirin's efficacy for the prevention of preterm birth. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology MFM. Volume 5, Issue 10, October 2023, 101095(Elsevier, 2024) Nuss, Emily E.; Hoffman, Matthew K.; Goudar, Shivaprasad S.; Kavi, Avinash; Metgud, Mrityunjay; Somannavar, Manjunath; Okitawutshu, Jean; Lokangaka, Adrien; Tshefu, Antoinette; Bauserman, Melissa; Tembo, Abigail Mwapule; Chomba, Elwyn; Carlo, Waldemar A.; Figueroa, Lester; Krebs, Nancy F.; Jessani, Saleem; Saleem, Sarah; Goldenberg, Robert L.; Kurhe, Kunal; Das, Prabir; Hibberd, Patricia L.; Achieng, Emmah; Nyongesa, Paul; Esamai, Fabian; Liechty, Edward A.; Bucher, Sherri; Goco, Norman; Hemingway-Foday, Jennifer; Moore, Janet; McClure, Elizabeth M.; Silver, Robert M.; Derman, Richard J.; Patel, Archana; Aspirin Supplementation for Pregnancy Indicated Risk Reduction In Nulliparas Study Group; Pediatrics, School of MedicineThe authors regret that the originally published manuscript erroneously excluded a contributing author Archana Patel MD, PhD. The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.Item Essentials of neonatal-perinatal medicine fellowship: scholarship perspective(Springer, 2021-02-17) Bauserman, Melissa; Vasquez, Margarita; Chess, Patricia R.; Carbajal, Melissa; ONTPD Fellowship Directors Writing Group; Good, Misty; Pediatrics, School of MedicineNeonatal-perinatal medicine fellows must achieve a meaningful accomplishment in scholarly activity as part of their training. Despite the requirement for scholarly training in fellowship, there is a vanishingly small number of MD-only physician-scientists pursuing a research-oriented career. Recent neonatal trainees have identified several factors that preclude their careers in research-focused academic neonatology, including lower pay in academic positions, inadequate training in research techniques, and the perception that individuals in research careers have a poor work-life balance. High competition for limited pediatric research funds also contributes to a diminishing pool of physician-scientists in neonatology. This small number of physician-scientists is threatened by a high rate of attrition among physicians who enter this career path. In order to prevent further declines in the number of neonatal physician-scientists, we need improvements in funding and strong intra- and cross-institutional mentorship to foster individuals interested in a career as a physician-scientist.Item Evaluating the effect of care around labor and delivery practices on early neonatal mortality in the Global Network's Maternal and Newborn Health Registry(Springer Nature, 2020-11-30) Patel, Archana B.; Simmons, Elizabeth M.; Rao, Sowmya R.; Moore, Janet; Nolen, Tracy L.; Goldenberg, Robert L.; Goudar, Shivaprasad S.; Somannavar, Manjunath S.; Esamai, Fabian; Nyongesa, Paul; Garces, Ana L.; Chomba, Elwyn; Mwenechanya, Musaku; Saleem, Sarah; Naqvi, Farnaz; Bauserman, Melissa; Bucher, Sherri; Krebs, Nancy F.; Derman, Richard J.; Carlo, Waldemar A.; Koso‑ThomasMcClure, Marion Elizabeth M.; Hibberd, Patricia L.; Pediatrics, School of MedicineBackground: Neonatal deaths in first 28-days of life represent 47% of all deaths under the age of five years globally and are a focus of the United Nation's (UN's) Sustainable Development Goals. Pregnant women are delivering in facilities but that does not indicate quality of care during delivery and the postpartum period. The World Health Organization's Essential Newborn Care (ENC) package reduces neonatal mortality, but lacks a simple and valid composite index that measures its effectiveness. Methods: Data on 5 intra-partum and 3 post-partum practices (indicators) recommended as part of ENC, routinely collected in NICHD's Global Network's (GN) Maternal Newborn Health Registry (MNHR) between 2010 and 2013, were included. We evaluated if all 8 practices (Care around Delivery - CAD), combined as an index was associated with reduced early neonatal mortality rates (days 0-6 of life). Results: A total of 150,848 live births were included in the analysis. The individual indicators varied across sites. All components were present in 19.9% births (range 0.4 to 31% across sites). Present indicators (8 components) were associated with reduced early neonatal mortality [adjusted RR (95% CI):0.81 (0.77, 0.85); p < 0.0001]. Despite an overall association between CAD and early neonatal mortality (RR < 1.0 for all early mortality): delivery by skilled birth attendant; presence of fetal heart and delayed bathing were associated with increased early neonatal mortality. Conclusions: Present indicators (8 practices) of CAD were associated with a 19% reduction in the risk of neonatal death in the diverse health facilities where delivery occurred within the GN MNHR. These indicators could be monitored to identify facilities that need to improve compliance with ENC practices to reduce preventable neonatal deaths. Three of the 8 indicators were associated with increased neonatal mortality, due to baby being sick at birth. Although promising, this composite index needs refinement before use to monitor facility-based quality of care in association with early neonatal mortality.Item Including ultrasound scans in antenatal care in low-resource settings: Considering the complementarity of obstetric ultrasound screening and maternity waiting homes in strengthening referral systems in low-resource, rural settings(Elsevier, 2019) Swanson, David L.; Franklin, Holly L.; Swanson, Jonathan O.; Goldenberg, Robert L.; McClure, Elizabeth M.; Mirza, Waseem; Muyodi, David; Figueroa, Lester; Goldsmith, Nicole; Kanaiza, Nancy; Naqvi, Farnaz; Pineda, Irma Sayury; López-Gomez, Walter; Hamsumonde, Dorothy; Bolamba, Victor Lokomba; Newman, Jamie E.; Fogleman, Elizabeth V.; Saleem, Sarah; Esamai, Fabian; Bucher, Sherri; Liechty, Edward A.; Garces, Ana L.; Krebs, Nancy F.; Hambidge, K. Michael; Chomba, Elwyn; Bauserman, Melissa; Mwenechanya, Musaku; Carlo, Waldemar A.; Tshefu, Antoinette; Lokangaka, Adrien; Bose, Carl L.; Nathan, Robert O.; Pediatrics, School of MedicineRecent World Health Organization (WHO) antenatal care recommendations include an ultrasound scan as a part of routine antenatal care. The First Look Study, referenced in the WHO recommendation, subsequently shows that the routine use of ultrasound during antenatal care in rural, low-income settings did not improve maternal, fetal or neonatal mortality, nor did it increase women's use of antenatal care or the rate of hospital births. This article reviews the First Look Study, reconsidering the assumptions upon which it was built in light of these results, a supplemental descriptive study of interviews with patients and sonographers that participated in the First Look study intervention, and a review of the literature. Two themes surface from this review. The first is that focused emphasis on building the pregnancy risk screening skills of rural primary health care personnel may not lead to adaptations in referral hospital processes that could benefit the patient accordingly. The second is that agency to improve the quality of patient reception at referral hospitals may need to be manufactured for obstetric ultrasound screening, or remote pregnancy risk screening more generally, to have the desired impact. Stemming from the literature, this article goes on to examine the potential for complementarity between obstetric ultrasound screening and another approach encouraged by the WHO, the maternity waiting home. Each approach may address existing shortcomings in how the other is currently understood. This paper concludes by proposing a path toward developing and testing such a hybrid approach.Item Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of pregnant women regarding COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy in 7 low- and middle-income countries: An observational trial from the Global Network for Women and Children's Health Research(Wiley, 2022-11) Naqvi, Seemab; Saleem, Sarah; Naqvi, Farnaz; Billah, Sk Masum; Nielsen, Eleanor; Fogleman, Elizabeth; Peres-da-Silva, Nalini; Figueroa, Lester; Mazariegos, Manolo; Garces, Ana L.; Patel, Archana; Das, Prabir; Kavi, Avinash; Goudar, Shivaprasad S.; Esamai, Fabian; Chomba, Elwyn; Lokangaka, Adrien; Tshefu, Antoinette; Haque, Rashidul; Siraj, Shahjahan; Yousaf, Sana; Bauserman, Melissa; Liechty, Edward A.; Krebs, Nancy F.; Derman, Richard J.; Carlo, Waldemar A.; Petri, William A., Jr.; Hibberd, Patricia L.; Koso-Thomas, Marion; Thorsten, Vanessa; McClure, Elizabeth M.; Goldenberg, Robert L.; Pediatrics, School of MedicineObjectives: We sought to determine the knowledge, attitudes and practices of pregnant women regarding COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy in seven low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Design: Prospective, observational, population-based study. Settings: Study areas in seven LMICs: Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, Guatemala, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Kenya and Zambia. Population: Pregnant women in an ongoing registry. Methods: COVID-19 vaccine questionnaires were administered to pregnant women in the Global Network's Maternal Newborn Health Registry from February 2021 through November 2021 in face-to-face interviews. Main outcome measures: Knowledge, attitude and practice regarding vaccination during pregnancy; vaccination status. Results: No women were vaccinated except for small proportions in India (12.9%) and Guatemala (5.5%). Overall, nearly half the women believed the COVID-19 vaccine is very/somewhat effective and a similar proportion believed that the COVID-19 vaccine is safe for pregnant women. With availability of vaccines, about 56.7% said they would get the vaccine and a 34.8% would refuse. Of those who would not get vaccinated, safety, fear of adverse effects, and lack of trust predicted vaccine refusal. Those with lower educational status were less willing to be vaccinated. Family members and health professionals were the most trusted source of information for vaccination. Conclusions: This COVID-19 vaccine survey in seven LMICs found that knowledge about the effectiveness and safety of the vaccine was generally low but varied. Concerns about vaccine safety and effectiveness among pregnant women is an important target for educational efforts to increase vaccination rates.Item Maternal age extremes and adverse pregnancy outcomes in low-resourced settings(Frontiers Media, 2023-11-28) Nyongesa, Paul; Ekhaguere, Osayame A.; Marete, Irene; Tenge, Constance; Kemoi, Milsort; Bann, Carla M.; Bucher, Sherri L.; Patel, Archana B.; Hibberd, Patricia L.; Naqvi, Farnaz; Saleem, Sarah; Goldenberg, Robert L.; Goudar, Shivaprasad S.; Derman, Richard J.; Krebs, Nancy F.; Garces, Ana; Chomba, Elwyn; Carlo, Waldemar A.; Mwenechanya, Musaku; Lokangaka, Adrien; Tshefu, Antoinette K.; Bauserman, Melissa; Koso-Thomas, Marion; Moore, Janet L.; McClure, Elizabeth M.; Liechty, Edward A.; Esamai, Fabian; Pediatrics, School of MedicineIntroduction: Adolescent (<20 years) and advanced maternal age (>35 years) pregnancies carry adverse risks and warrant a critical review in low- and middle-income countries where the burden of adverse pregnancy outcomes is highest. Objective: To describe the prevalence and adverse pregnancy (maternal, perinatal, and neonatal) outcomes associated with extremes of maternal age across six countries. Patients and methods: We performed a historical cohort analysis on prospectively collected data from a population-based cohort study conducted in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Guatemala, India, Kenya, Pakistan, and Zambia between 2010 and 2020. We included pregnant women and their neonates. We describe the prevalence and adverse pregnancy outcomes associated with pregnancies in these maternal age groups (<20, 20-24, 25-29, 30-35, and >35 years). Relative risks and 95% confidence intervals of each adverse pregnancy outcome comparing each maternal age group to the reference group of 20-24 years were obtained by fitting a Poisson model adjusting for site, maternal age, parity, multiple gestations, maternal education, antenatal care, and delivery location. Analysis by region was also performed. Results: We analyzed 602,884 deliveries; 13% (78,584) were adolescents, and 5% (28,677) were advanced maternal age (AMA). The overall maternal mortality ratio (MMR) was 147 deaths per 100,000 live births and increased with advancing maternal age: 83 in the adolescent and 298 in the AMA group. The AMA groups had the highest MMR in all regions. Adolescent pregnancy was associated with an adjusted relative risk (aRR) of 1.07 (1.02-1.11) for perinatal mortality and 1.13 (1.06-1.19) for neonatal mortality. In contrast, AMA was associated with an aRR of 2.55 (1.81 to 3.59) for maternal mortality, 1.58 (1.49-1.67) for perinatal mortality, and 1.30 (1.20-1.41) for neonatal mortality, compared to pregnancy in women 20-24 years. This pattern was overall similar in all regions, even in the <18 and 18-19 age groups. Conclusion: The maternal mortality ratio in the LMICs assessed is high and increased with advancing maternal age groups. While less prevalent, AMA was associated with a higher risk of adverse maternal mortality and, like adolescence, was associated with adverse perinatal mortality with little regional variation.Item An overview of malaria in pregnancy(Elsevier, 2019-08) Bauserman, Melissa; Conroy, Andrea L.; North, Krysten; Patterson, Jackie; Bose, Carl; Meshnick, Steve; Pediatrics, School of MedicineOne hundred twenty-five million pregnant women are at risk for contracting malaria, a preventable cause of maternal and infant morbidity and death. Malaria parasites contribute to adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes due to their preferential accumulation in placental intervillous spaces. Pregnant women are particularly vulnerable to malaria infections, and malaria infections during pregnancy put their fetuses at risk. Malaria in pregnancy is associated with anemia, stillbirth, low birth weight and maternal and fetal death. We review the challenges to diagnosing malaria in pregnancy, as well as strategies to prevent and treat malaria in pregnancy. Finally, we discuss the current gaps in knowledge and potential areas for continued research.Item Predictive Modeling for Perinatal Mortality in Resource-Limited Settings(American Medical Association, 2020-11-02) Shukla, Vivek V.; Eggleston, Barry; Ambalavanan, Namasivayam; McClure, Elizabeth M.; Mwenechanya, Musaku; Chomba, Elwyn; Bose, Carl; Bauserman, Melissa; Tshefu, Antoinette; Goudar, Shivaprasad S.; Derman, Richard J.; Garcés, Ana; Krebs, Nancy F.; Saleem, Sarah; Goldenberg, Robert L.; Patel, Archana; Hibberd, Patricia L.; Esamai, Fabian; Bucher, Sherri; Liechty, Edward A.; Koso-Thomas, Marion; Carlo, Waldemar A.; Pediatrics, School of MedicineImportance: The overwhelming majority of fetal and neonatal deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries. Fetal and neonatal risk assessment tools may be useful to predict the risk of death. Objective: To develop risk prediction models for intrapartum stillbirth and neonatal death. Design, setting, and participants: This cohort study used data from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Global Network for Women's and Children's Health Research population-based vital registry, including clinical sites in South Asia (India and Pakistan), Africa (Democratic Republic of Congo, Zambia, and Kenya), and Latin America (Guatemala). A total of 502 648 pregnancies were prospectively enrolled in the registry. Exposures: Risk factors were added sequentially into the data set in 4 scenarios: (1) prenatal, (2) predelivery, (3) delivery and day 1, and (4) postdelivery through day 2. Main outcomes and measures: Data sets were randomly divided into 10 groups of 3 analysis data sets including training (60%), test (20%), and validation (20%). Conventional and advanced machine learning modeling techniques were applied to assess predictive abilities using area under the curve (AUC) for intrapartum stillbirth and neonatal mortality. Results: All prenatal and predelivery models had predictive accuracy for both intrapartum stillbirth and neonatal mortality with AUC values 0.71 or less. Five of 6 models for neonatal mortality based on delivery/day 1 and postdelivery/day 2 had increased predictive accuracy with AUC values greater than 0.80. Birth weight was the most important predictor for neonatal death in both postdelivery scenarios with independent predictive ability with AUC values of 0.78 and 0.76, respectively. The addition of 4 other top predictors increased AUC to 0.83 and 0.87 for the postdelivery scenarios, respectively. Conclusions and relevance: Models based on prenatal or predelivery data had predictive accuracy for intrapartum stillbirths and neonatal mortality of AUC values 0.71 or less. Models that incorporated delivery data had good predictive accuracy for risk of neonatal mortality. Birth weight was the most important predictor for neonatal mortality.