Salerno Cristina, Donno Valeria, Melis Beatrice, Perrone Enrica, Menichini Daniela, Facchinetti Fabio, Monari Francesca
Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, Mother-Infant and Adult Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.
International Doctorate School in Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Department of Biomedical, Metabolic and Neural Sciences, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.
J Perinat Med. 2022 Jun 7;50(6):653-659. doi: 10.1515/jpm-2022-0129. Print 2022 Jul 26.
Data collected worldwide on stillbirth (SB) rates during the Covid-19 pandemic are contradictory. Variations may be due to methodological differences or population characteristics. The aim of the study is to assess the changes in SB rate, risk factors, causes of death and quality of antenatal care during the pandemic compared to the control periods.
This prospective study is based on the information collected by the Emilia-Romagna Surveillance system database. We conducted a descriptive analysis of SB rate, risk factors, causes of death and quality of cares, comparing data of the pandemic (March 2020-June 2021) with the 16 months before.
During the pandemic, the SB rate was 3.45/1,000 births, a value in line with the rates of previous control periods. Neonatal weight >90th centile was the only risk factor for SB that significantly changed during the pandemic (2.2% vs. 8.0%; p-value: 0.024). No significant differences were found in the distribution of the causes of death groups. Concerning quality of antenatal cares, cases evaluated with suboptimal care (5.2%) did not change significantly compared to the control period (12.0%), as well as the cases with less than recommended obstetric (12.6% vs. 14%) and ultrasound evaluations (0% vs. 2.7%).
During the COVID-19 pandemic, no significant differences in SB rates were found in an area that maintained an adequate level of antenatal care. Thus, eventual associations between SB rate and the COVID-19 infection are explained by an indirect impact of the virus, rather than its direct effect.
全球收集的关于新冠疫情期间死产（SB）率的数据相互矛盾。差异可能是由于方法学差异或人群特征所致。本研究的目的是评估与对照期相比，疫情期间死产率、危险因素、死亡原因及产前护理质量的变化。
这项前瞻性研究基于艾米利亚 - 罗马涅监测系统数据库收集的信息。我们对死产率、危险因素、死亡原因及护理质量进行了描述性分析，将疫情期间（2020年3月至2021年6月）的数据与之前16个月的数据进行了比较。
在疫情期间，死产率为3.45/1000例分娩，这一数值与之前对照期的比率一致。新生儿体重>第90百分位数是疫情期间唯一显著变化的死产危险因素（2.2%对8.0%；p值：0.024）。在死亡原因组的分布上未发现显著差异。关于产前护理质量，评估为护理欠佳的病例（5.2%）与对照期（12.0%）相比没有显著变化，产科评估少于推荐次数的病例（12.6%对14%）以及超声评估少于推荐次数的病例（0%对2.7%）亦是如此。
在新冠疫情期间，在一个维持了足够产前护理水平的地区，未发现死产率有显著差异。因此，死产率与新冠病毒感染之间的任何关联是由病毒的间接影响而非直接影响所解释。
