Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2025
Inequities in prenatal neonatology consultation in high-mortality neonatal populations.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Simpson Samantha L, Mena Kylie, Cortezzo DonnaMaria E, Liu Chunyan, Ehrlich Shelley R, Eaton Sarah, Fu Ting Ting, Beck Andrew F, Greenberg James M, Miller Emily R
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To explore inequities in prenatal consultation and parental resuscitation decisions across high-mortality conditions.
STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective chart review of pregnant people whose liveborn neonates were diagnosed with high-mortality conditions. We examined two cohorts: periviable infants (22 0/7-24 6/7 weeks) and infants with severe congenital anomalies.
RESULTS: A total of 194 neonates met eligibility criteria for the periviable cohort, 197 for the congenital anomaly cohort. In the periviable cohort, 94% of White vs. 81% of Black pregnant people received neonatology consultation (p = 0.009). A total of 96% of those with commercial insurance vs. 82% of those with Medicaid received consultation (p = 0.005). Half of Hispanic pregnant people did not receive neonatology consultation (p = 0.02). In the congenital anomaly cohort, pregnant people who spoke a language other than English were less likely to receive consultation (44% vs. 81%, p = 0.02).
CONCLUSIONS: This regional assessment found previously unrecognized inequities in prenatal neonatology consultation.
STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective chart review of pregnant people whose liveborn neonates were diagnosed with high-mortality conditions. We examined two cohorts: periviable infants (22 0/7-24 6/7 weeks) and infants with severe congenital anomalies.
RESULTS: A total of 194 neonates met eligibility criteria for the periviable cohort, 197 for the congenital anomaly cohort. In the periviable cohort, 94% of White vs. 81% of Black pregnant people received neonatology consultation (p = 0.009). A total of 96% of those with commercial insurance vs. 82% of those with Medicaid received consultation (p = 0.005). Half of Hispanic pregnant people did not receive neonatology consultation (p = 0.02). In the congenital anomaly cohort, pregnant people who spoke a language other than English were less likely to receive consultation (44% vs. 81%, p = 0.02).
CONCLUSIONS: This regional assessment found previously unrecognized inequities in prenatal neonatology consultation.