Perinatology clinic in the coronavirus disease-2019 pandemic: what harms, often teaches

Abstract

Background: Compartmental models simplify the mathematical modeling of infectious diseases based on reported cases. In the absence of precautions, personal protective equipment, quarantine and social distancing, a Susceptible-Exposed-Infectious-Recovered (SuEIR) model with Unscented Kalman Filter for coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) Forecasts in Turkey has revealed 174 641 infected people on August 15, 2020, whilst the reported case was 12 216. Through numerical experiments, the effects of quarantine, social distancing, and COVID-19 testing on the dynamics of the outbreak varies. We herein present the documentation of the work in a perinatology clinic during COVID-19 pandemic to find the reflection in a pandemic hospital as even in the pandemic, pregnancy complications and fetal diagnosis/therapy are time-sensitive and cannot be delayed. During the prevention of the horizontal transmission to the health-care workers (HCWs), testing all pregnant women with nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swabs for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-COV-2) undergoing birth, ultrasound examinations, invasive procedures appear to be the gold standard so that appropriate precautions can be taken if the screen is positive. Though it is logical, it may be incompatible with a busy obstetric practise as a pending polymerase chain reaction (PCR) result should never delay any emergent procedure.

Objective: We aim to describe the development of COVID-19 disease of 408 HCW out of 1462 by the exposure to pregnant women while providing obstetric care in a single tertiary perinatology unit under strict clinical triage, recommended precautions and wearing personal protective equipment and compare the maternal and perinatal outcome with those of the preceding three months.

Study design: A prospective cohort study involving the pregnant women and the HCW with positive PCR for SARS-COV-2 were carried out to correlate with the horizontal transmission while documenting the perinatal work.

Results: 25 HCW, including nurses/midwives: 11, doctors: 7 and health technicians: 3 and support staff: 4 developed positive PCR for SARS-COV-2 while providing healthcare to 162 cases: mild-moderate (n = 146), severe (n = 12) and critical (n = 1) and asymptomatic (n = 3) in obstetric population. 22 out of 25 HCW were working in the perinatology unit. COVID-19 clinic was asymptomatic (n = 8), mild-moderate (13) or severe (n = 2) in HCW. However, "Exposed" group in the SuEIR model, both the pregnant women and the HCW that have already been infected and have not been tested, which have been also capable of infecting the "Susceptible" group could not be determined. Some of the HCW and the pregnant women in the "Exposed" group were tested and transferred to the "Infectious" group (which were reported to be PCR positive), while the rest of them who recovered, transitted to the so-called "Unreported Recovered" group. The ratio of the women with severe pre-eclampsia admitted to intensive care unit increased significantly during the lockdown (p = .01).

Conclusions: In a nonstop pandemic perinatology clinic, exposure to 162 PCR positive pregnant women may be correlated with a 5.4% (22/408) documented horizontal transmission in the frontline HCW despite clinical triage and personal protective equipment.

Keywords: Coronavirus disease-19 in pregnancy; health-care workers; personal protective equipment; physical distancing; virus transmission.