加拿大农村B群链球菌定植妊娠中膜剥离的母婴结局

IF 1.4 3区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Franciska Otaner , Roksana Behruzi
{"title":"加拿大农村B群链球菌定植妊娠中膜剥离的母婴结局","authors":"Franciska Otaner ,&nbsp;Roksana Behruzi","doi":"10.1016/j.srhc.2025.101123","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>This study aimed to evaluate the safety of membrane sweeping in Group B Streptococcus-positive pregnancies by assessing maternal and neonatal surrogate outcomes in a rural, midwifery-led birth center.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A retrospective chart review was conducted for 67 Group B Streptococcus-positive pregnant women under midwife care—31 who received membrane stripping and 36 who did not—were analyzed using data from the birth center’s database and Medesync hospital records.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>No early-onset neonatal Group B Streptococcus cases were reported. Membrane stripping showed no association with intrapartum transfers (p &gt; 0.99) or reasons for transfer (p = 0.13). Apgar scores at 1, 5, and 10 min were unaffected (p = 0.37, 0.81, 0.80). Mean gestational age was higher with membrane stripping (40.2 vs. 39.4 weeks, p = 0.02, d = 0.62), though not clinically significant. Higher birth weight in the membrane stripping group (3663.0 g vs. 3394.8 g, p = 0.01, Cohen’s d = 0.63) was similarly not clinically significant. No effects were observed on birth type (p &gt; 0.99), feeding type at 72 h or 6 weeks (p = 0.82, p &gt; 0.99), transfer after 32 weeks (p = 0.36), or maternal and neonatal clinical notes (p = 0.29, p &gt; 0.99). Potential confounders like gravida, para, abortus status (p = 0.79, p = 0.20, p = 0.26), prior cesarean section (p = 0.99), and maternal age (p = 0.69) did not affect outcomes.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Membrane stripping was not associated with adverse maternal or neonatal surrogate outcomes in Group B Streptococcus-positive pregnancies. These findings support its potential safety, though larger multi-center studies are needed to inform clinical guidelines.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54199,"journal":{"name":"Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 101123"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Maternal and neonatal outcomes of membrane stripping in rural canadian group B Streptococcus-colonized pregnancies\",\"authors\":\"Franciska Otaner ,&nbsp;Roksana Behruzi\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.srhc.2025.101123\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>This study aimed to evaluate the safety of membrane sweeping in Group B Streptococcus-positive pregnancies by assessing maternal and neonatal surrogate outcomes in a rural, midwifery-led birth center.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A retrospective chart review was conducted for 67 Group B Streptococcus-positive pregnant women under midwife care—31 who received membrane stripping and 36 who did not—were analyzed using data from the birth center’s database and Medesync hospital records.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>No early-onset neonatal Group B Streptococcus cases were reported. Membrane stripping showed no association with intrapartum transfers (p &gt; 0.99) or reasons for transfer (p = 0.13). Apgar scores at 1, 5, and 10 min were unaffected (p = 0.37, 0.81, 0.80). Mean gestational age was higher with membrane stripping (40.2 vs. 39.4 weeks, p = 0.02, d = 0.62), though not clinically significant. Higher birth weight in the membrane stripping group (3663.0 g vs. 3394.8 g, p = 0.01, Cohen’s d = 0.63) was similarly not clinically significant. No effects were observed on birth type (p &gt; 0.99), feeding type at 72 h or 6 weeks (p = 0.82, p &gt; 0.99), transfer after 32 weeks (p = 0.36), or maternal and neonatal clinical notes (p = 0.29, p &gt; 0.99). Potential confounders like gravida, para, abortus status (p = 0.79, p = 0.20, p = 0.26), prior cesarean section (p = 0.99), and maternal age (p = 0.69) did not affect outcomes.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Membrane stripping was not associated with adverse maternal or neonatal surrogate outcomes in Group B Streptococcus-positive pregnancies. These findings support its potential safety, though larger multi-center studies are needed to inform clinical guidelines.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54199,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare\",\"volume\":\"45 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101123\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877575625000618\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877575625000618","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在通过评估农村助产中心的产妇和新生儿代孕结局来评估B组链球菌阳性妊娠中膜清扫的安全性。方法对67例经助产士护理的B组链球菌阳性孕妇(31例接受膜剥离,36例未接受膜剥离)进行回顾性分析,并利用生育中心数据库和Medesync医院记录的数据进行分析。结果无新生儿早发性B组链球菌病例报告。膜剥离与产时转移无关(p >;0.99)或转移原因(p = 0.13)。Apgar评分在1、5、10 min时未受影响(p = 0.37、0.81、0.80)。膜剥离组平均胎龄较高(40.2周vs 39.4周,p = 0.02, d = 0.62),但无临床意义。剥膜组新生儿出生体重较高(3663.0 g比3394.8 g, p = 0.01, Cohen’s d = 0.63),同样无临床意义。未观察到对出生类型的影响(p >;0.99), 72 h或6周饲喂方式(p = 0.82, p >;0.99), 32周后转移(p = 0.36),或孕产妇和新生儿临床记录(p = 0.29, p >;0.99)。潜在的混杂因素如妊娠、分娩、流产状态(p = 0.79, p = 0.20, p = 0.26)、既往剖宫产(p = 0.99)和产妇年龄(p = 0.69)对结局没有影响。结论在B组链球菌阳性妊娠中,膜剥离与母体或新生儿的不良结局无关。这些发现支持其潜在的安全性,尽管需要更大的多中心研究来为临床指南提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Maternal and neonatal outcomes of membrane stripping in rural canadian group B Streptococcus-colonized pregnancies

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate the safety of membrane sweeping in Group B Streptococcus-positive pregnancies by assessing maternal and neonatal surrogate outcomes in a rural, midwifery-led birth center.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was conducted for 67 Group B Streptococcus-positive pregnant women under midwife care—31 who received membrane stripping and 36 who did not—were analyzed using data from the birth center’s database and Medesync hospital records.

Results

No early-onset neonatal Group B Streptococcus cases were reported. Membrane stripping showed no association with intrapartum transfers (p > 0.99) or reasons for transfer (p = 0.13). Apgar scores at 1, 5, and 10 min were unaffected (p = 0.37, 0.81, 0.80). Mean gestational age was higher with membrane stripping (40.2 vs. 39.4 weeks, p = 0.02, d = 0.62), though not clinically significant. Higher birth weight in the membrane stripping group (3663.0 g vs. 3394.8 g, p = 0.01, Cohen’s d = 0.63) was similarly not clinically significant. No effects were observed on birth type (p > 0.99), feeding type at 72 h or 6 weeks (p = 0.82, p > 0.99), transfer after 32 weeks (p = 0.36), or maternal and neonatal clinical notes (p = 0.29, p > 0.99). Potential confounders like gravida, para, abortus status (p = 0.79, p = 0.20, p = 0.26), prior cesarean section (p = 0.99), and maternal age (p = 0.69) did not affect outcomes.

Conclusions

Membrane stripping was not associated with adverse maternal or neonatal surrogate outcomes in Group B Streptococcus-positive pregnancies. These findings support its potential safety, though larger multi-center studies are needed to inform clinical guidelines.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare
Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
5.60%
发文量
73
审稿时长
45 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信