scholarly journals Routine screening for SARS CoV-2 in unselected pregnant women at delivery

PLoS ONE ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (9) ◽  
pp. e0239887
Author(s):  
Pilar Díaz-Corvillón ◽  
Max Mönckeberg ◽  
Antonia Barros ◽  
Sebastián E. Illanes ◽  
Arturo Soldati ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Routine Screening

scholarly journals Screening for Coxiella burnetii infection during pregnancy: pros and cons according to the Wilson and Jungner criteria

2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
J M Munster ◽  
L M Steggerda ◽  
A C Leenders ◽  
J G Aarnoudse ◽  
E Hak
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Coxiella Burnetii ◽  
Q Fever ◽  
Risk Group ◽  
High Risk Group ◽  
Routine Screening ◽  
Maternal Complications ◽  
Clinical Consequences ◽  
Pros And Cons

In Europe the incidence of human Q fever has dramatically increased over the previous years. Untreated infections with Coxiella burnetii, the causal agent of Q fever, have been associated with both obstetric and maternal complications. The majority of pregnant women with a C. burnetii infection remain asymptomatic, hence screening could be of value to prevent unwanted outcomes in this high-risk group. We applied the updated Wilson and Jungner criteria to review the evidence for routine screening for C. burnetii infection during pregnancy. Since much uncertainty remains about the incidence, clinical consequences, diagnostics and treatment of C. burnetii infection during pregnancy, routine screening for C. burnetii infection during pregnancy should not be recommended. Rigorous studies to assess the effectiveness of C. burnetii screening are warranted.

Gonococcal Ophthalmia Neonatorum and Routine Screening of Pregnant Women for Gonorrheal Infection

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1973 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 302-303
Author(s):  
Hania W. Ris
Keyword(s):  
Prenatal Care ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Silver Nitrate ◽  
Prophylactic Treatment ◽  
Routine Screening ◽  
Significant Frequency ◽  
Ophthalmia Neonatorum

Drs. Snowe and Wilfert's1 timely paper on epidemic reappearance of gonococcal ophthalmia neonatorum calls attention to a very serious problem. Recently in Wisconsin a case of gonococcal ophthalmia was reported2 in a 3-day-old infant who received silver nitrate prophylactic treatment. The prenatal care consisted of 14 visits to an obstetrician, which did not include screening for gonorrhea. The author's statement in the summary "gonorrhea occurs with significant frequency in obstetrical groups to merit attempts at therapy of the gravid mother" could be misinterpreted as advocating treatment without establishing a diagnosis.

Pregnant Women's Attitudes and Knowledge in Relation to Access to Serum-Alpha-Fetoprotein Test

1988 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 197-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie-Louise Sandén ◽  
Per Bjurulf
Keyword(s):  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Prenatal Screening ◽  
Alpha Fetoprotein ◽  
Routine Screening ◽  
Consecutive Series ◽  
Testing Procedures ◽  
Serum Alpha Fetoprotein ◽  
Level Of Knowledge ◽  
Attitudes And Knowledge ◽  
Antenatal Clinics

Serum-Alpha-Fetoprotein (se-AFP) screening is a controversial issue in Sweden. In some areas the test has never been offered, in others it is routinely offered to all pregnant women and there are areas where the se-AFP test has been offered but is no longer available but for very special indications. This pseudoexperimental situations was used to analyze the effects of different information environments on attitudes to and knowledge of testing procedures at the antenatal clinics, especially the se-AFP test, and anxiety of malformations. Consecutive series of pregnant women in these three areas filled in questionnaires at their first visit, in the 22nd to 24th, and the 32nd to 35th weeks of pregnancy, and after delivery. The attitudes to prenatal screening were most positive in the routine screening area and most negative in the area which previously but no longer offers the test. The level of knowledge was somewhat higher in the routine screening area at the first visit to the clinic and increased substantially, especially in the routine screening area.

scholarly journals Routine screening of antenatal population for thyroid disorders-mandatory

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (7) ◽  
pp. 2834
Author(s):  
Kaliki Hymavathi ◽  
Malini Devi Gottipati ◽  
Tejaswini Jakka ◽  
Bhavana T. C.
Keyword(s):  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Pregnancy Outcomes ◽  
Thyroid Dysfunction ◽  
Thyroid Stimulating Hormone ◽  
Routine Screening ◽  
Overt Hypothyroidism ◽  
Thyroid Peroxidase ◽  
Thyroid Disorders ◽  
Thyroid Function Tests ◽  
Successful Pregnancy

Background: Thyroid dysfunction is commonly seen in pregnant women causing adverse maternal and fetal effects. Routine screening of antenatal population for the same will be helpful for successful pregnancy outcomes. The objective of this study is to detect and treat antenatal women with Thyroid dysfunction to avoid deleterious maternal/ fetal effects.Methods: The present study is a hospital based prospective study conducted in the department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of Narayana Medical College and Hospital(NMCH), Nellore, Andhra Pradesh, India. 1000 pregnant women were randomly recruited into this study. Apart from routine antenatal investigations, Thyroid function tests (TFT) - Thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH), freeT4 (fT4) and Thyroid peroxidase antibody (TPO Ab) are done for all the recruited women at the first visit of antenatal booking and individual Thyroid tests are repeated as required.Results: Following the TFT the study population is classified into pregnancies with euthyroidism‚ subclinical/ overt hypothyroidism and hyperthyroidism. The prevalence of Thyroid disorders in present study was 12.7% of which hypothyroidism noted in 10.3% (subclinical 6.9% and overt 3.4%) while hyperthyroidism seen in 2.4% (subclinical 1.8% and overt 0.6%). The various pregnancy complications, labour and neonatal outcomes have been analyzed.Conclusions: Thyroid dysfunction in pregnancy affects the health of the mother as well as the baby. Screening for Thyroid dysfunction should be performed as part of the routine antenatal work-up for successful pregnancy outcomes.

scholarly journals Assessing Immunity to Rubella Virus: a Plea for Standardization of IgG (Immuno)assays

2016 ◽  
Vol 54 (7) ◽  
pp. 1720-1725 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elise Bouthry ◽  
Milena Furione ◽  
Daniela Huzly ◽  
Adaeze Ogee-Nwankwo ◽  
LiJuan Hao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Immunoglobulin G ◽  
Rubella Virus ◽  
Routine Screening ◽  
Clinical Decisions ◽  
International Standard ◽  
Specific Immunoglobulin ◽  
Quantitative Results ◽  
Definition Of

Immunity to rubella virus (RV) is commonly determined by measuring specific immunoglobulin G (RV IgG). However, RV IgG results and their interpretation may vary, depending on the immunoassay, even though most commercial immunoassays (CIAs) have been calibrated against an international standard and results are reported in international units per milliliter. A panel of 322 sera collected from pregnant women that tested negative or equivocal for RV IgG in a prior test (routine screening) was selected. This panel was tested with two reference tests, immunoblotting (IB) and neutralization (Nt), and with 8 CIAs widely used in Europe. IB and Nt gave concordant results on 267/322 (82.9%) sera. Of these, 85 (26.4%) sera were negative and 182 (56.5%) sera were positive for both tests. All 85 IB/Nt-negative samples were classified as negative with all CIAs. Of the 182 IB/Nt-positive samples, 25.3 to 61.5% were classified as equivocal and 6 to 64.8% were classified as positive with the CIAs. Wide variations in titers in international units per milliliter were observed. In our series, more than half of the women considered susceptible to RV based on CIA results tested positive for RV antibodies by IB/Nt. Our data suggest that (i) sensitivity of CIAs could be increased by considering equivocal results as positive and (ii) the definition of immunity to RV as the 10-IU/ml usual cutoff as well as the use of quantitative results for clinical decisions may warrant reconsideration. A better standardization of CIAs for RV IgG determination is needed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document