ArticleWomen's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health
Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Obstetric Interventions at a Public Hospital.
Article in Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes in Pregnancies with PCR-Confirmed SARS-CoV-2 Infection Ending in Live Birth: A Single-Centre Turkish Cohort Benchmarked Against National Reference Data.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Healthcare utilization in the departments of obstetrics and gynecology during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic: time series analysis in Jining, China.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Does infection with COVID-2019 during labor increase the risk for obstetric anal sphincter injuries?International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Article
- Comparison of Modified Labor Induction Strategies for Pregnant Women at a Single Tertiary Center Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Rural-urban and racial differences in cesarean deliveries before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in South Carolina.Midwifery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn response to the COVID-19 pandemic, health systems quickly implemented changes in care delivery with a goal of balancing patient-focused obstetric care with the need to protect pregnant persons and health care providers from infection. Yet, there is no consensus within the scientific community on the impact these measures have on obstetric outcomes in vulnerable populations. We aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on rates of obstetric procedures and severe maternal morbidity (SMM) among births at an urban safety net institution.
methodsWe used an interrupted time series design to calculate risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) comparing monthly rates of labor induction, cesarean births (overall and among nulliparous, term, singleton, vertex births), operative vaginal births, and SMM among births occurring at a public hospital before (March 1, 2016, to February 29, 2020) and during (March 1, 2020, to May 31, 2021) the COVID-19 pandemic.
resultsThere were 10,714 and 2,736 births in the prepandemic and postpandemic periods, respectively. Overall, the rates of obstetric interventions and SMM were constant over the two time periods. There were no significant differences in rates of labor induction (42% during prepandemic period vs. 45% during pandemic period; RR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.93-1.34), operative vaginal births (5% vs. 6%; RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.88-1.76), cesarean births (28% vs. 33%; RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.94-1.28), or nulliparous, term, singleton, vertex cesarean births (24% vs. 31%; RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.92-1.74). Rates of SMM (7% vs. 8%; RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.86-1.65) were also unchanged.
conclusionsOur findings indicate that the rapid implementation of measures to reduce viral transmission in the labor and delivery setting did not materially affect routine clinical management or rates of serious maternal complications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.