Publications

Maderas Rainforest Conservancy (MRC) was incorporated as a conservation nonprofit organization in 2008, and manages two sites where biological field courses have been offered since the 1990s: La Suerte Biological Research Station in Costa Rica, and Ometepe Biological Research Station in Nicaragua. MRC employs a One Health approach to conservation education, and can serve as a model for other biological field sites. The Nicaraguan Molina family, who owns the sites, partnered with primatologist Paul Garber in 1994 to develop a primate field course aimed at introducing university students to field research. Through using their land to further conservation education and research, the Molina family has preserved the forest and engaged the local communities near their sites. Eight graduate theses and 46 refereed publications have been completed since 2010 based on research undertaken at MRC sites. While primate field courses have been offered at least once annually since 1994 and remain popular, a range of other ecological courses are now additionally offered. MRC operates from a One Health perspective, engaging in forest restoration and ecological monitoring projects, and has gradually expanded community outreach initiatives. MRC now conducts regular medical and veterinary missions in the communities surrounding the research stations which provide health care to local people and limit the population growth of domestic animals, thereby increasing the survival of wild animals. MRC is also active in ESL-teaching and conservation education, and funds Proyecto Jade, which empowers local women to make and sell organic jewelry. Through these programs, MRC works to help the local communities live more sustainably with the environment around them. MRC's support of research, commitment to education, medical and veterinary missions, and outreach initiatives to the local community all work together for the well-being of both the people and the environment, thus exemplifying the One Health perspective.

IMPORTANCE: Little is known about changes in obstetric outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether obstetric outcomes and pregnancy-related complications changed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective cohort study included pregnant patients receiving care at 463 US hospitals whose information appeared in the PINC AI Healthcare Database. The relative differences in birth outcomes, pregnancy-related complications, and length of stay (LOS) during the pandemic period (March 1, 2020, to April 31, 2021) were compared with the prepandemic period (January 1, 2019, to February 28, 2020) using logistic and Poisson models, adjusting for patients' characteristics, and comorbidities and with month and hospital fixed effects.

EXPOSURES: COVID-19 pandemic period.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The 3 primary outcomes were the relative change in preterm vs term births, mortality outcomes, and mode of delivery. Secondary outcomes included the relative change in pregnancy-related complications and LOS.

RESULTS: There were 849 544 and 805 324 pregnant patients in the prepandemic and COVID-19 pandemic periods, respectively, and there were no significant differences in patient characteristics between periods, including age (≥35 years: 153 606 [18.1%] vs 148 274 [18.4%]), race and ethnicity (eg, Hispanic patients: 145 475 [47.1%] vs 143 905 [17.9%]; White patients: 456 014 [53.7%] vs 433 668 [53.9%]), insurance type (Medicaid: 366 233 [43.1%] vs 346 331 [43.0%]), and comorbidities (all standardized mean differences <0.10). There was a 5.2% decrease in live births during the pandemic. Maternal death during delivery hospitalization increased from 5.17 to 8.69 deaths per 100 000 pregnant patients (odds ratio [OR], 1.75; 95% CI, 1.19-2.58). There were minimal changes in mode of delivery (vaginal: OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.996-1.02; primary cesarean: OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04; vaginal birth after cesarean: OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.95-1.00; repeated cesarean: OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.95-0.97). LOS during delivery hospitalization decreased by 7% (rate ratio, 0.931; 95% CI, 0.928-0.933). Lastly, the adjusted odds of gestational hypertension (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.06-1.11), obstetric hemorrhage (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04-1.10), preeclampsia (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02-1.06), and preexisting chronic hypertension (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.03-1.09) increased. No significant changes in preexisting racial and ethnic disparities were observed.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, there were increased odds of maternal death during delivery hospitalization, cardiovascular disorders, and obstetric hemorrhage. Further efforts are needed to ensure risks potentially associated with the COVID-19 pandemic do not persist beyond the current state of the pandemic.

BACKGROUND: We assessed understanding of the obstetric consent form between patients with English and Spanish language preference.

METHODS: This observational study included pregnant patients who identified as Hispanic/Latinx with English or Spanish language preference (defined as what language the patient prefers to receive healthcare information) and prenatal care providers at a large academic medical center from 2018 to 2021. Patient demographics, language preference, literacy, numeracy, acculturation, comprehension of the obstetric consent, and provider explanations were collected.

RESULTS: We report descriptive statistics and thematic analysis with an inductive approach from 30 patients with English preference, 10 with Spanish preference, and 23 providers. The English group demonstrated 72% median correct responses about the consent form; the Spanish group demonstrated 61% median correct responses. Regardless of language, the participants demonstrated limited understanding of certain topics, such as risks of cesarean birth.

DISCUSSION: Overall comprehension of key information in an obstetric consent form was low, with differences in language groups, which highlights opportunities for improvements in communication across language barriers. Innovations in the communication of critical pregnancy information for patients with limited English proficiency need to be developed and tested.

In Mexico, over the last decade, more non-physician medical professionals have been participating in birth care according to recent federal regulations. So far, very few sites have been able to implement birth care models where midwives and obstetric nurses participate. We describe the experience of a group of intern obstetric nurses participating in a model that provides respectful birth care to rural populations, managed by an international NGO in partnership with the Ministry of Health of Chiapas, Mexico. We conducted a case study including individual interviews and focus group discussions with obstetric nurse interns participating in the Compañeros En Salud programme over four years from 2016 to 2019. We applied targeted content analysis to the qualitative data. There were 28 participants from 4 groups of interns. Informants expressed their opinions in four areas: (a) training as a LEO, (b) training experience at CES, (c) LEO role in health care delivery; and (d) LEOs' perspectives about respectful maternity care. Interns identified gaps in their training including a higher load of theoretical content vs practical experience, as well as little supervision of clinical care in public hospitals. Their adaptation to the health services model has increased over time, and recent classes acknowledge the difficulties that earlier ones had to confront, including the challenging interactions with hospital staff. Interns have incorporated the value of respectful birth care and their role to protect this right in rural populations. Findings could be useful to call for the expansion of the model in public birth centres.

INTRODUCTION: Reproductive injustices such as forced sterilization, preventable maternal morbidity and mortality, restricted access to family planning services, and policy-driven environmental violence undermine reproductive autonomy and health outcomes, with disproportionate impact on historically marginalized communities. However, curricula focused on reproductive justice (RJ) are lacking in medical education.

METHODS: We designed a novel, interactive, case-based RJ curriculum for postclerkship medical students. This curriculum was created using published guidelines on best practices for incorporating RJ in medical education. The session included a prerecorded video on the history of RJ, an article, and four interactive cases. Students engaged in a 2-hour small-group session, discussing key learning points of each case. We evaluated the curriculum's impact with a pre- and postsurvey and focus group.

RESULTS: Sixty-eight students participated in this RJ curriculum in October 2020 and March 2021. Forty-one percent of them completed the presurvey, and 46% completed the postsurvey. Twenty-two percent completed both surveys. Ninety percent of respondents agreed that RJ was relevant to their future practice, and 87% agreed that participating in this session would impact their clinical practice. Most respondents (81%) agreed that more RJ content is needed. Focus group participants appreciated the case-based, interactive format and the intersectionality within the cases.

DISCUSSION: This interactive curriculum is an innovative and effective way to teach medical students about RJ and its relevance to clinical practice. Walking alongside patients as they accessed reproductive health care in a case-based curriculum improved students' comfort and self-reported knowledge on several RJ topics.

OBJECTIVE: Acute peripheral arterial events, such as aortic dissection, carotid artery dissection, vertebral artery dissection, and ruptured renoviseral aneurysms, have been reported during pregnancy in case series, but there is a paucity of population-based data. This study sought to establish pregnancy and preeclampsia as risk factors for acute peripheral arterial events. Approach and Results: All women who gave birth between 1998 and 2020 within a multicenter health care system were identified. Births that occurred in women <18 or >50 years of age were excluded. Primary outcome was any acute peripheral arterial event that was symptomatic or required intervention. Cox regression model was used to evaluate the association between vascular events and pregnancy as a time-varying covariate. The pregnancy exposure period was from the estimated date of conception to 3 months postpartum. There were 277 697 pregnancies (81.3% deliveries, 17.0% abortions, and 1.7% ectopics) among 176 635 women with 1.68 million patient-years of total follow-up (median, 7.9 years; interquartile range, 2.4-16.2). Preeclampsia complicated 5.3% of pregnancies; 67 790 of 225 763 (30.0%) deliveries were delivered by cesarean. Ninety-six acute arterial events occurred during follow-up, of which 24 occurred during pregnancy, including the postpartum period. Pregnancy (hazard ratio, 1.85 [95% CI, 1.01-3.38]; P=0.046) and preeclampsia (hazard ratio, 10.9 [95% CI, 5.24-22.7]; P<0.001) were significant independent predictors of acute arterial events.

CONCLUSIONS: While taking into account limitations from estimating conception and outcome dates, pregnancy, especially when complicated by preeclampsia, is associated with an increased risk of acute peripheral arterial events.

Health professions educators continuously adapt curricular content in response to new scientific knowledge but can struggle to incorporate content about current social issues that profoundly affect students and learning environments. This article offers recommendations to support innovation and action as students and faculty grapple with ongoing unrest in the United States, including racism, murders of Black people by police, and COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) published the WHO Safe Childbirth Checklist in 2015, which included the key evidence-based practices to prevent the major causes of maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality during childbirth. We assessed the current use of the WHO Safe Childbirth Checklist (SCC) and adaptations regarding the SCC tool and implementation strategies in different contexts from Africa, Southeast Asia, Europe, and North America.

METHODS: This explanatory, sequential mixed methods study-including surveys followed by interviews-of global SCC implementers focused on adaptation and implementation strategies, data collection, and desired improvements to support ongoing SCC use. We analyzed the survey results using descriptive statistics. In a subset of respondents, follow-up virtual semi-structured interviews explored how they adapted, implemented, and evaluated the SCC in their context. We used rapid inductive and deductive thematic analysis for the interviews.

RESULTS: Of the 483 total potential participants, 65 (13.5%) responded to the survey; 55 completed the survey (11.4%). We analyzed completed responses from those who identified as having SCC implementation experience (n = 29, 52.7%). Twelve interviews were conducted and analyzed. Ninety percent of respondents indicated that they adapted the SCC tool, including adding clinical and operational items. Adaptations to structure included translation into local language, incorporation into a mobile app, and integration into medical records. Respondents reported variation in implementation strategies and data collection. The most common implementation strategies were meeting with stakeholders to secure buy-in, incorporating technical training, and providing supportive supervision or coaching around SCC use. Desired improvements included clarifying the purpose of the SCC, adding guidance on relevant clinical topics, refining items addressing behaviors with low adherence, and integrating contextual factors into decision-making. To improve implementation, participants desired political support to embed SCC into existing policies and ongoing clinical training and coaching.

CONCLUSION: Additional adaptation and implementation guidance for the SCC would be helpful for stakeholders to sustain effective implementation.