Article

A population-based comparison of strategies to prevent early-onset group B streptococcal disease in neonates

Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States
New England Journal of Medicine (Impact Factor: 54.42). 08/2002; 347(4):233-9. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa020205
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Guidelines issued in 1996 in the United States recommend either screening of pregnant women for group B streptococcal colonization by means of cultures (screening approach) or assessing clinical risk factors (risk-based approach) to identify candidates for intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis.
In a multistate retrospective cohort study, we compared the effectiveness of the screening and risk-based approaches in preventing early-onset group B streptococcal disease (in infants less than seven days old). We studied a stratified random sample of the 629,912 live births in 1998 and 1999 in eight geographical areas where there was active surveillance for group B streptococcal infection, including all births in which the neonate had early-onset disease. Women with no documented culture for group B streptococcus were considered to have been cared for according to the risk-based approach.
We studied 5144 births, including 312 in which the newborn had early-onset group B streptococcal disease. Antenatal screening was documented for 52 percent of the mothers. The risk of early-onset disease was significantly lower among the infants of screened women than among those in the risk-based group (adjusted relative risk, 0.46; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.36 to 0.60). Because women whose providers had no strategy for prophylaxis may have been misclassified in the risk-based group, we excluded all women with risk factors and adequate time for prophylaxis who did not receive antibiotics. The adjusted relative risk of early-onset disease associated with the screening approach in this secondary analysis was similar--0.48 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.37 to 0.63).
Routine screening for group B streptococcus during pregnancy prevents more cases of early-onset disease than the risk-based approach. Recommendations that endorse both strategies as equivalent warrant reconsideration.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Elizabeth R Zell, Jun 24, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
171 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background. Infants born to mothers who are colonized with group B streptococcus (GBS) but received <4 hours of intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP) are at-risk for presenting later with sepsis. We assessed if <4 hours of maternal IAP for GBS are associated with an increased incidence of clinical neonatal sepsis. Materials and Methods. A retrospective cohort study of women-infant dyads undergoing IAP for GBS at ≥37-week gestation who presented in labor from January 1, 2003 through December 31, 2007 was performed. Infants diagnosed with clinical sepsis by the duration of maternal IAP received (< or ≥4-hours duration) were determined. Results. More infants whose mothers received <4 hours of IAP were diagnosed with clinical sepsis, 13 of 1,149 (1.1%) versus 15 of 3,633 (0.4%), P = .03. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that treatment with ≥4 hours of IAP reduced the risk of infants being diagnosed with clinical sepsis by 65%, adjusted relative risk 0.35, CI 0.16-0.79, and P = .01. Conclusion. The rate of neonatal clinical sepsis is increased in newborns of GBS colonized mothers who receive <4 hours compared to ≥4 hours of IAP.
    Infectious Diseases in Obstetrics and Gynecology 03/2013; 2013(1):525878. DOI:10.1155/2013/525878
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study was performed to determine the prevalence of GBS and to identify GBS colonisation risk factors in a multicultural population of pregnant women in The Netherlands. We calculated predictive values of cultures in pregnancy for intrapartum GBS carriage. From a total of 1702 women visiting several antenatal outpatient departments, rectovaginal swabs were collected at 35-37 weeks' gestation. In 761 women swabs were repeated at time of delivery. Carriage of GBS late in third trimester and at time of delivery was analysed in relation to age, parity, ethnicity and socio-economic status. Twenty-one percent was GBS carrier late in pregnancy. Compared to Europeans, African women were at a higher risk (29%, RR 1.4, CI 1.1-1.7) and Asian women were at lower risk (13%, RR 0.6, CI 0.4-0.8) for GBS carriage. No differences in colonisation were found between women with respect to age, parity or socio-economic background. Positive predictive value of GBS carriage at 35-37 weeks' gestation for carriage at time of parturition was 79% and negative predictive value was 93%. It was not possible to identify a group of pregnant women at high risk for GBS colonisation. Predictive values of antenatal genital group B streptococci cultures at 35-37 weeks' gestation for intrapartum GBS carriage are lower than previously reported.
    European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology 03/2006; 124(2):178-83. DOI:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2005.06.007 · 1.63 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Perinatally acquired bacterial neonatal sepsis is a low-incidence,high-risk disease. Although incidence of the most common etiology,group B Streptococcus, has been reduced by prophylactic strategies,neonatal sepsis has not been eradicated, and vigilance must remain high. Accurate diagnosis is difficult: signs and symptoms are hard to distinguish from other causes of neonatal distress, and definitive diagnostic tests are not available. The clinician must make a judgment call, considering the perinatal history, the constellation of signs and symptoms, and the results of existing diagnostic tests,before neonatal sepsis can diagnosed or excluded. With diagnosis,knowledge of the specific disease states and clinical algorithms for management aid in formulating a plan of treatment with antimicrobial agents and supportive care.
    Pediatric Clinics of North America 09/2004; 51(4):939-59, viii-ix. DOI:10.1016/j.pcl.2004.03.009 · 2.20 Impact Factor