Browsing by Author "Peipert, Jeffrey F."
Now showing 1 - 10 of 52
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item 786 Neonatal outcomes in pregnant women with diagnosis of COVID-19(Elsevier, 2021) Izewski, Joanna; Boudova, Sarah; Rouse, Caroline E.; Ibrahim, Sherrine A.; Shanks, Anthony L.; Reinhardt, Jeff C.; Scifres, Christina; Haas, David M.; Peipert, Jeffrey F.; Tuuli, Methodius G.; Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of MedicineObjective It is unclear whether infection with COVID-19 during pregnancy increases the risk of adverse neonatal outcomes. We tested the hypothesis that a diagnosis of COVID-19 during pregnancy increases the risk of neonatal respiratory morbidity and other adverse neonatal outcomes. Study Design: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from two labor and delivery units with universal COVID-19 testing policy between March 1 and May 31, 2020. Pregnant women with singleton pregnancies who delivered during the study period and underwent testing for COVID-19 at any point in their pregnancy were eligible. The primary outcome was a composite of neonatal respiratory morbidity defined as the occurrence of any one of the following: respiratory distress syndrome, transient tachypnea of the newborn, and need for respiratory support. The risk of neonatal morbidity with and without a COVID-19 diagnosis were compared using univariable and multivariable analyses. Stratified analysis compared the risks of adverse neonatal outcomes in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with COVID-19 to those without COVID-19. Results: Of 515 subjects meeting inclusion criteria, 55 (10.7%) tested positive for COVID-19; 19 (34.6%) were asymptomatic and 36 (65.4%) were symptomatic. No neonate tested positive for COVID-19. Rates of the primary outcome, composite neonatal respiratory morbidity, were not significantly different in patients with and without COVID-19 (21.8% vs 19.6%, P=0.692). There was no significant difference in the risk of neonatal respiratory morbidity in a Cox regression model accounting for time from diagnosis to delivery, and adjusting for gestational age at delivery, mode of delivery, and maternal diabetes (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.62; 95% CI 0.35, 1.09). There were no significant differences in any of the secondary outcomes in patients with COVID-19 who were asymptomatic or symptomatic (Table). Conclusion: A diagnosis of COVID-19 during pregnancy does not appear to increase the risk of neonatal morbidity. These data may be useful in counseling women diagnosed with COVID-19 during pregnancy.Item 975 ABO blood group, rhesus type and risk of COVID-19 in pregnant women(Elsevier, 2021) Ibrahim, Sherrine A.; Boudova, Sarah; Rouse, Caroline E.; Shanks, Anthony L.; Reinhardt, Jeffrey; Scifres, Christina; Haas, David M.; Peipert, Jeffrey F.; Tuuli, Methodius G.; Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of MedicineObjective: There is controversy regarding the association of ABO blood group, Rhesus (Rh) type and risk of COVID-19. We tested the hypothesis that ABO blood group and Rh type are associated with COVID-19 diagnosis and symptoms during pregnancy. Study Design: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from two labor and delivery units with universal SARS-CoV-2 testing policy between March 1 and May 31, 2020. All pregnant women tested during the study period were eligible. The primary outcome was COVID-19 diagnosis. Secondary outcomes were measures of COVID-19 severity, including symptoms, ICU admission, respiratory support and treatment for COVID-19. Outcomes were compared across ABO blood groups. Women with blood group O or Rh positive blood type were compared with non-O groups and Rh negative, respectively, using univariable and multivariable analyses. Results: Of 586 pregnant women tested, 66 (11.3%) were positive. The most common ABO blood group in the cohort was O (52.2%) and 87.4% were Rh positive. Rates of the primary outcome, COVID-19 diagnosis, were not significantly different across ABO blood groups (P=0.47). There were also no significant differences in measures of COVID-19 severity among blood groups (Table). Compared to other blood groups, the risk of COVID-19 diagnosis was not significantly different in women with group O (13.1% vs 9.3%, adjusted OR 1.43; 95% CI 0.84, 2.4). Rh positive women were at a significantly higher risk of COVID-19 diagnosis (12.3% vs 4.1%, adjusted OR 3.38; 95% CI 1.03, 11.07) and a non-significant increased risk of symptoms (6.8% vs 2.7%, adjusted OR 2.67; 95% CI 0.63, 11.32), after adjusting for ABO blood group (Figure). Conclusion: We found no association between ABO blood group and diagnosis or severity of COVID-19 in pregnant women. However, Rhesus positive women may be at a higher risk of COVID-19.Item A human-centered designed outreach strategy for a youth contraception navigator program(Elsevier, 2022) Wilkinson, Tracey A.; Hawryluk, Bridget; Moore, Courtney; Peipert, Jeffrey F.; Carroll, Aaron E.; Wiehe, Sarah; Fortenberry, J. Dennis; Pediatrics, School of MedicineObjective: To identify key elements of an outreach strategy for a youth contraception navigator program designed to help young people overcome barriers to contraception access. Methods: A human-centered design approach was used to engage adolescents aged 15-17 in co-design sessions. Human-centered design techniques, such as affinity diagramming and model building were used to inform key elements of the communication model and the final outreach strategy messages. Results: Messages focused on the individual, normalizing talking about birth control, acknowledging the challenges to obtaining birth control, explaining how the navigator program works resonate with young people. Having images of diverse participants, offering information about birth control, and showing images of reputable sources will enhance trust. Conclusions: A name (IN Control) and key elements of an outreach strategy were determined for the navigator program. It is important to work with key stakeholders and co-design the optimal strategy and messages to assure that the intended audience is reached, and the desired behavior change is achieved. Innovation: Human-centered design techniques can be used to provide insight into programmatic outreach strategies for a contraception navigator program to increase their impact and ultimate success.Item A statement on abortion by 900 professors of Obstetrics and Gynecology after the reversal of Roe versus Wade(Elsevier, 2024-01-01) Espey, Eve; Teal, Stephanie; Peipert, Jeffrey F.; Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of MedicineIn the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology in 1972 and 2013, 100 leaders in obstetrics and gynecology wrote calls to action—in 1972 in anticipation of the Roe v Wade decision and in 2013 in concern over the increasing restrictions to abortion care. In this article, 900 professors support a call to action for reinstating federal protections for abortion. Over a year ago, the Supreme Court handed down the Dobbs decision, overturning nearly 50 years of precedent in retracting the constitutionally protected right to abortion. The medical community is already seeing the harms of this decision on the lives and health of our patients and on the ability to train upcoming physicians in this medically necessary evidence-based care. Further harms are anticipated, including negative effects on maternal mortality. The 900 professors of obstetrics and gynecology whose signatures appear at the conclusion of this article stand together in support of reproductive freedom, including the right to affordable, accessible, safe, and legal abortion care.Item Anticipated pain as a predictor of discomfort with intrauterine device placement(Elsevier, 2018-02) Dina, Blair; Peipert, Leah; Zhao, Qiuhong; Peipert, Jeffrey F.; Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of MedicineBackground Intrauterine devices have been gaining popularity for the past 2 decades. Current data report that >10% of women who use contraception are using an intrauterine device. With <1% failure rates, the intrauterine device is one of the most effective forms of long-acting reversible contraception, yet evidence shows that fear of pain during intrauterine device placement deters women from choosing an intrauterine device as their contraceptive method. Objectives The objective of this analysis was to estimate the association between anticipated pain with intrauterine device placement and experienced pain. We also assessed other factors associated with increased discomfort during intrauterine device placement. We hypothesized that patients with higher levels of anticipated pain would report a higher level of discomfort during placement. Study Design We performed a secondary analysis of the Contraceptive CHOICE Project. There were 9256 patients enrolled in Contraceptive CHOICE Project from the St. Louis region from 2007–2011; data for 1149 subjects who came for their first placement of either the original 52-mg levonorgestrel intrauterine system or the copper intrauterine device were analyzed in this study. Patients were asked to report their anticipated pain before intrauterine device placement and experienced pain during placement on a 10-point visual analog scale. We assessed the association of anticipated pain, patient demographics, reproductive characteristics, and intrauterine device type with experienced pain with intrauterine device placement. Results The mean age of Contraceptive CHOICE Project participants in this subanalysis was 26 years. Of these 1149 study subjects, 44% were black, and 53% were of low socioeconomic status. The median expected pain score was 5 for both the levonorgestrel intrauterine system and the copper intrauterine device; the median experienced pain score was 5 for the levonorgestrel intrauterine system and 4 for the copper intrauterine device. After we controlled for parity, history of dysmenorrhea, and type of intrauterine device, higher anticipated pain was associated with increased experienced pain (adjusted relative risk for 1 unit increase in anticipated pain, 1.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.14–1.25). Nulliparity, history of dysmenorrhea, and the hormonal intrauterine device (compared with copper) also were associated with increased pain with intrauterine device placement. Conclusion High levels of anticipated pain correlated with high levels of experienced pain during intrauterine device placement. Nulliparity and a history of dysmenorrhea were also associated with greater discomfort during placement. This information may help guide and treat patients as they consider intrauterine device placement. Future research should focus on interventions to reduce preprocedural anxiety and anticipated pain to potentially decrease discomfort with intrauterine device placement.Item Association Between Intrauterine Device Type and Risk of Perforation and Device Expulsion: Results From the APEX-IUD Study(ScienceDirect, 2022) Gatz, Jennifer L.; Armstrong, Mary Anne; Postlethwaite, Debbie; Raine-Bennett, Tina; Chillemi, Giulia; Alabaster, Amy; Merchant, Maqdooda; Reed, Susan D.; Ichikawa, Laura; Getahun, Darios; Fassett, Michael J.; Shi, Jiaxiao M.; Xie, Fagen; Chiu, Vicki Y.; Im, Theresa M.; Takhar, Harpreet S.; Wang, Jinyi; Saltus, Catherine W.; Ritchey, Mary E.; Asiimwe, Alex; Pisa, Federica; Schoendorf, Juliane; Wahdan, Yesmean; Zhou, Xiaolei; Hunter, Shannon; Anthony, Mary S.; Peipert, Jeffrey F.; Medicine, School of MedicineBackground Intrauterine devices, including levonorgestrel-releasing and copper devices, are highly effective long-acting reversible contraceptives. The potential risks associated with intrauterine devices are low and include uterine perforation and device expulsion. Objective This study aimed to evaluate the risk of perforation and expulsion associated with levonorgestrel-releasing devices vs copper devices in clinical practice in the United States. Study Design The Association of Perforation and Expulsion of Intrauterine Devices study was a retrospective cohort study of women aged ≤50 years with an intrauterine device insertion during 2001 to 2018 and information on intrauterine device type and patient and medical characteristics. Of note, 4 research sites with access to electronic health records contributed data for the study: 3 Kaiser Permanente–integrated healthcare systems (Northern California, Southern California, and Washington) and 1 healthcare system using data from a healthcare information exchange in Indiana (Regenstrief Institute). Perforation was classified as any extension of the device into or through the myometrium. Expulsion was classified as complete (not visible in the uterus or abdomen or patient reported) or partial (any portion in the cervix or malpositioned). We estimated the crude incidence rates and crude cumulative incidence by intrauterine device type. The risks of perforation and expulsion associated with levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices vs copper intrauterine devices were estimated using Cox proportional-hazards regression with propensity score overlap weighting to adjust for confounders. Results Among 322,898 women included in this analysis, the incidence rates of perforation per 1000 person-years were 1.64 (95% confidence interval, 1.53–1.76) for levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices and 1.27 (95% confidence interval, 1.08–1.48) for copper intrauterine devices; 1-year and 5-year crude cumulative incidence was 0.22% (95% confidence interval, 0.20–0.24) and 0.63% (95% confidence interval, 0.57–0.68) for levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices and 0.16% (95% confidence interval, 0.13–0.20) and 0.55% (95% confidence interval, 0.44–0.68) for copper intrauterine devices, respectively. The incidence rates of expulsion per 1000 person-years were 13.95 (95% confidence interval, 13.63–14.28) for levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices and 14.08 (95% confidence interval, 13.44–14.75) for copper intrauterine devices; 1-year and 5-year crude cumulative incidence was 2.30% (95% confidence interval, 2.24–2.36) and 4.52% (95% confidence interval, 4.40–4.65) for levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices and 2.30% (95% confidence interval, 2.18–2.44) and 4.82 (95% confidence interval, 4.56–5.10) for copper intrauterine devices, respectively. Comparing levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices with copper intrauterine devices, the adjusted hazard ratios were 1.49 (95% confidence intervals, 1.25–1.78) for perforation and 0.69 (95% confidence intervals, 0.65–0.73) for expulsion. Conclusion After adjusting for potential confounders, levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices were associated with an increased risk of uterine perforation and a decreased risk of expulsion relative to copper intrauterine devices. Given that the absolute numbers of these events are low in both groups, these differences may not be clinically meaningful.Item Association between intrauterine device use and endometrial, cervical, and ovarian cancer: an expert review(Elsevier, 2023-08) Minalt, Nicole; Caldwell, Amy; Yedlicka, Grace M.; Joseph, Sophia; Robertson, Sharon E.; Landrum, Lisa M.; Peipert, Jeffrey F.; Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of MedicineThe intrauterine device is one of the most effective forms of contraception. Use of the intrauterine device has increased in the United States over the last 2 decades. Two formulations are commercially available in the United States: the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device and the copper intrauterine device. The levonorgestrel intrauterine device releases progestin, causing endometrial suppression and cervical mucus thickening, whereas the primary mechanism of action of the copper intrauterine device is to create a local inflammatory response to prevent fertilization. Whereas the protective effects of combined hormonal contraception against ovarian and endometrial cancer, and of tubal sterilization against ovarian cancer are generally accepted, less is known about the effects of modern intrauterine devices on the development of gynecologic malignancies. The best evidence for a protective effect of intrauterine device use against cancer incidence pertains to levonorgestrel intrauterine devices and endometrial cancer, although studies suggest that both copper intrauterine devices and levonorgestrel intrauterine devices reduce endometrial cancer risk. This is supported by the proposed dual mechanisms of action including both endometrial suppression and a local inflammatory response. Studies on the relationship between intrauterine device use and ovarian cancer risk show conflicting results, although most data suggest reduced risk of ovarian cancer in intrauterine device users. The proposed biological mechanisms of ovarian cancer reduction (foreign-body inflammatory response, increased pH, antiestrogenic effect, ovulation suppression) vary by type of intrauterine device. Whereas it has been well established that use of copper intrauterine devices confers a lower risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasms, the effect of levonorgestrel intrauterine device use on cervical cancer remains unclear. Older studies have linked its use to a higher incidence of cervical dysplasia, but more recent literature has found a decrease in cervical cancer with intrauterine device use. Various mechanisms of protection are postulated, including device-related inflammatory response in the endocervical canal and prostaglandin-mediated immunosurveillance. Overall, the available evidence suggests that both levonorgestrel intrauterine devices and copper intrauterine devices reduce gynecologic cancer risk. Whereas there is support for the reduction of endometrial cancer risk with hormonal and copper intrauterine device use, and reduction of cervical cancer risk with copper intrauterine device use, evidence in support of risk reduction with levonorgestrel intrauterine device use for cervical and ovarian cancers is less consistent.Item Association Between Menorrhagia and Risk of Intrauterine Device-Related Uterine Perforation and Device Expulsion: Results from the APEX-IUD Study(ScienceDirect, 2022) Getahun, Darios; Fassett, Michael J.; Gatz, Jennifer; Armstrong, Mary Anne; Peipert, Jeffrey F.; Raine-Bennett, Tina; Reed, Susan D.; Zhou, Xiaolei; Schoendorf, Juliane; Postlethwaite, Debbie; Shi, Jiaxiao M.; Saltus, Catherine W.; Wang, Jinyi; Xie, Fagen; Chiu, Vicki Y.; Merchant, Maqdooda; Alabaster, Amy; Ichikawa, Laura E.; Hunter, Shannon; Im, Theresa M.; Takhar, Harpreet S.; Ritchey, Mary E.; Chillemi, Giulia; Pisa, Federica; Asiimwe, Alex; Anthony, Mary S.; Regenstrief Institute, School of MedicineBackground Intrauterine devices are effective contraception, and one levonorgestrel-releasing device is also indicated for treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding (menorrhagia). Objective To compare the incidence of intrauterine device expulsion and uterine perforation in women with and without a diagnosis of menorrhagia within the 12 months before device insertion. Study Design Retrospective cohort study conducted in 3 integrated healthcare systems (Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Southern California, and Washington) and a healthcare information exchange (Regenstrief Institute) in the United States, using electronic health records. Nonpostpartum women aged ≤50 years with intrauterine device (e.g., levonorgestrel or copper) insertions from 2001–2018 without a delivery in the prior 12 months were studied in this analysis. Recent menorrhagia diagnosis (i.e., recorded ≤12 months before insertion) was ascertained from International Classification of Diseases, Ninth/Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification codes. Study outcomes—device expulsion and device-related uterine perforation (complete or partial)—were ascertained from electronic medical records and validated in data sources. Cumulative incidence and crude incidence rates with 95% confidence intervals were estimated. Cox proportional hazards models estimated crude and adjusted hazard ratios using propensity score overlap weighting (13-16 variables) and 95% confidence intervals. Results Among 228,834 nonpostpartum women, mean age was 33.1 years, 44.4% were White, and 31,600 (13.8%) had a recent menorrhagia diagnosis. Most women had a levonorgestrel-releasing device (96.4% of those with and 78.2% of those without a menorrhagia diagnosis). Women with a menorrhagia diagnosis were likely to be older, obese, and have dysmenorrhea or fibroids. Women with vs. without a menorrhagia diagnosis had a higher intrauterine device expulsion rate (40.01 vs. 10.92 per 1,000 person-years), especially evident in the few months after insertion. Women with a menorrhagia diagnosis had higher cumulative incidence (95% confidence interval) of expulsion (7.00% [6.70%, 7.32%] at 1 year, 12.03% [11.52%, 12.55%] at 5 years) vs. without (1.77% [1.70%, 1.84%] at 1 year, 3.69% [3.56%, 3.83%] at 5 years). Risk of expulsion was increased for women with a menorrhagia diagnosis vs. without (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.84 [95% confidence interval: 2.66, 3.03]). Perforation rate was low overall (<1/1,000 person-years) but higher in women with a diagnosis of menorrhagia vs. without (0.98 vs. 0.63 per 1,000 person-years). Cumulative incidence (95% confidence interval) of uterine perforation was slightly higher for women with a menorrhagia diagnosis (0.09% [0.06%, 0.14%] at 1 year, 0.39% [0.29%, 0.53%] at 5 years) vs. without (0.07% [0.06%, 0.08%], at 1 year, 0.28% [0.24%, 0.33%] at 5 years). Risk of perforation was slightly increased in women with a menorrhagia diagnosis vs. without (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.10, 2.13). Conclusion The risk of expulsion is significantly higher in women with a recent diagnosis of menorrhagia. Patient education and counseling regarding potential expulsion risk is recommended at insertion. The absolute risk of perforation for women with a recent diagnosis of menorrhagia is very low. Increased expulsion and perforation rates observed are likely due to causal factors of menorrhagia.Item Association between obesity and bacterial vaginosis as assessed by Nugent score(Elsevier, 2019) Brookheart, Rita T.; Lewis, Warren G.; Peipert, Jeffrey F.; Lewis, Amanda L.; Allsworth, Jenifer E.; Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of MedicineBackground Bacterial vaginosis is one of the most common vaginal conditions in the U.S. Recent studies have suggested obese women have an abnormal microbiota reminiscent of BV; however, few studies have investigated the prevalence of bacterial vaginosis in overweight and obese populations. Moreover, despite the increased prevalence of obesity and bacterial vaginosis in black women, it is not known whether racial disparities exist in the relationship between obesity and bacterial vaginosis. Objective The objective of this study was to examine the relationship between body mass index and bacterial vaginosis as determined by Nugent score and to determine the influence of race in this context. Study Design We performed a cross-sectional study using patient data and vaginal smears from 5,918 participants of the Contraceptive CHOICE Project. Gram stained vaginal smears were scored using the Nugent method and categorized as BV-negative (Nugent score 0-3), BV-intermediate (Nugent score 4-6), or BV-positive (Nugent score 7-10). Body mass index was determined using Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines and obese individuals were categorized as Class I, II, or III obese based on NIH and World Health Organization body mass index parameters. Linear regression was used to model mean differences in Nugent scores and Poisson regression with robust error variance was used to model prevalence of bacterial vaginosis. Results In our cohort, 50.7% of participants were black, 41.5% were white, and 5.1% were of Hispanic ethnicity with an average age of 25.3 years old. Overall, 28.1% of participants were bacterial vaginosis-positive. Bacterial vaginosis was prevalent in 21.3% of lean, 30.4% of overweight, and 34.5% of obese women (p<0.001). The distribution of bacterial vaginosis-intermediate individuals was similar across all body mass index categories. Compared to lean women, Nugent scores were highest among overweight and obese Class I women (adjusted mean difference; overweight 0.33 [95% CI 0.14, 0.51] and Class I obese 0.51 [95% CI 0.29, 0.72]). Consistent with this, overweight and obese women had a higher frequency of bacterial vaginosis compared to lean women, even after adjusting for variables including race. Among white women, the prevalence of BV was higher for overweight and Class I and Class II/III obese white women compared to lean white women, a phenomenon not observed among black women, suggesting an effect modification. Conclusion Overweight and obese women have higher Nugent scores and a greater occurrence of bacterial vaginosis compared to lean women. Black women have a greater prevalence of bacterial vaginosis independent of their body mass index compared to white women.Item Association of Comprehensive Immediate Postpartum Contraception with Infant Outcomes(American Medical Association, 2022) Wilkinson, Tracey A.; Peipert, Jeffrey F.; Pediatrics, School of Medicine