Background Pertussis vaccination in pregnancy is recommended in many countries to provide protection to young infants. The best timing for this vaccination is uncertain. In the UK, vaccination is recommended between 16 weeks and 32 weeks of gestation. In this trial we aimed to investigate the equivalence of three time periods for pertussis vaccination in pregnancy. Methods In this open-label, equivalence, randomised controlled trial to investigate equivalence of different time windows for pertussis vaccination in pregnancy, participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1 ratio) to receive a pertussis-containing vaccine (Boostrix-inactivated poliovirus vaccine) in one of three gestational age groups, comprising group 1 (<= 23 weeks + 6 days), group 2 (24-27 weeks + 6 days), and group 3 (28-31 weeks + 6 days) using a computer-generated randomisation list. The primary outcome was concentration of pertussis-specific antibodies in the infant born at term at birth. Maternal blood sampling was done before and 2 weeks after vaccination and at delivery, together with a cord sample, and an infant sample was collected at least 4 weeks after primary vaccination. Reactogenicity was assessed for 7 days after vaccination. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03908164). Findings Between May 7, 2019, and Feb 13, 2020, of 1010 women assessed for eligibility, 364 women were recruited and 351 received the intervention (120 in group 1, 119 in group 2, and 112 in group 3). Equivalence of time periods was demonstrated for anti-pertussis toxin and anti-pertactin IgG concentrations. The cord blood geometric mean concentrations of anti-filamentous haemagglutinin IgG were higher with increasing gestational age at vaccination, such that for infants in group 1 (<= 23 weeks + 6 days), equivalence to group 3 (28-31 weeks + 6 days) was not shown. Reported rates of fever were similar between study groups. Interpretation Pertussis vaccination at three different time intervals in pregnancy resulted in equivalent concentrations of IgG antibodies in infants against two of the three pertussis antigens assessed. Overall, these findings support recommendations to vaccinate any time between 16 weeks and 32 weeks of gestation.

BACKGROUND:Diabetes in pregnancy is associated with preterm delivery, birthweight extremes, and increased rates of congenital anomaly, stillbirth, and neonatal death. We aimed to identify and compare modifiable risk factors associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes in women with type 1 diabetes and those with type 2 diabetes and to identify effective maternity clinics. METHODS:In this national population-based cohort study, we used data for pregnancies among women with type 1 or type 2 diabetes collected in the first 5 years of the National Pregnancy in Diabetes audit across 172 maternity clinics in England, Wales, and the Isle of Man, UK. Data for obstetric complications (eg, preterm delivery [<37 weeks' gestation], large for gestational age [LGA] birthweight [>90th percentile]) and adverse pregnancy outcomes (congenital anomaly, stillbirth, neonatal death) were obtained for pregnancies completed between Jan 1, 2014, and Dec 31, 2018. We assessed associations between modifiable (eg, HbA1c, BMI, pre-pregnancy care, maternity clinic) and non-modifiable risk factors (eg, age, ethnicity, deprivation, duration of type 1 diabetes) with pregnancy outcomes in women with type 1 diabetes compared with those with type 2 diabetes. We calculated associations between maternal factors and perinatal deaths using a regression model, including diabetes type and duration, maternal age, BMI, deprivation quintile, first trimester HbA1c, preconception folic acid, potentially harmful medications, and third trimester HbA1c. FINDINGS:Our dataset included 17 375 pregnancy outcomes in 15 290 pregnant women. 8690 (50·0%) of 17 375 pregnancies were in women with type 1 diabetes (median age at delivery 30 years [10-90th percentile 22-37], median duration of diabetes 13 years [3-25]) and 8685 (50·0%) were in women with type 2 diabetes (median age at delivery 34 years [27-41], median duration of diabetes 3 years [0-10]). The rates of preterm delivery (3325 [42·5%] of 7825 pregnancies among women with type 1 diabetes, 1825 [23·4%] of 7815 with type 2 diabetes; p<0·0001), and LGA birthweight (4095 [52·2%] of 7845 with type 1 diabetes, 2065 [26·2%] of 7885 with type 2 diabetes; p<0·0001) were higher in type 1 diabetes. The prevalence of congenital anomaly (among women with type 1 diabetes: 44·8 per 1000 livebirths, terminations, and fetal losses; among women with type 2 diabetes: 40·5 per 1000 livebirths, terminations, and fetal losses; p=0·17) and stillbirth (type 1 diabetes: 10·4 per 1000 livebirths and stillbirths; type 2 diabetes: 13·5 per 1000 livebirths and stillbirths; p=0·072) did not significantly differ between diabetes types, but rates of neonatal death were higher in mothers with type 2 diabetes than in those with type 1 diabetes (type 1 diabetes: 7·4 per 1000 livebirths; type 2 diabetes 11·2 per 1000 livebirths; p=0·013). Across the whole study population, independent risk factors for perinatal death (ie, stillbirth or neonatal death) were third trimester HbA1c of 6·5% (48 mmol/mol) or higher (odds ratio 3·06 [95% CI 2·16-4·33] vs HbA1c <6·5%), being in the highest deprivation quintile (2·29 [1·16-4·52] vs the lowest quintile), and having type 2 diabetes (1·65 [1·18-2·31] vs type 1 diabetes). Variations in HbA1c and LGA birthweight were associated with maternal characteristics (age, diabetes duration, deprivation, BMI) without substantial differences between maternity clinics. INTERPRETATION:Our data highlight persistent adverse pregnancy outcomes in women with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Maternal glycaemia and BMI are the key modifiable risk factors. No maternity clinics were had appreciably better outcomes than any others, suggesting that health-care system changes are needed across all clinics. FUNDING:None.

INTRODUCTION:Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a common cause of infant hospitalization and mortality. With multiple vaccines in development, we aimed to determine: (1) the awareness of RSV among pregnant women and healthcare professionals (HCPs), and (2) attitudes toward clinical trials and routine implementation of antenatal RSV vaccination. METHODS:Separate questionnaires for pregnant women and HCPs were distributed within 4 hospitals in South England (July 2017-January 2018). RESULTS:Responses from 314 pregnant women and 204 HCPs (18% obstetricians, 75% midwives, 7% unknown) were analyzed. Most pregnant women (88%) and midwives (66%) had no/very little awareness of RSV, unlike obstetricians (14%). Among pregnant women, 29% and 75% would likely accept RSV vaccination as part of a trial, or if routinely recommended, respectively. Younger women (16-24 years), those of 21-30 weeks' gestation, and with experience of RSV were significantly more likely to participate in trials [odds ratio (OR): 1.42 (1.72-9.86); OR: 2.29 (1.22-4.31); OR: 9.07 (1.62-50.86), respectively]. White-British women and those of 21-30 weeks' gestation were more likely to accept routinely recommended vaccination [OR: 2.16 (1.07-4.13); OR: 2.10 (1.07-4.13)]. Obstetricians were more likely than midwives to support clinical trials [92% vs. 68%, OR: 2.50 (1.01-6.16)] and routine RSV vaccination [89% vs. 79%, OR: 4.08 (1.53-9.81)], as were those with prior knowledge of RSV, and who deemed it serious. CONCLUSIONS:RSV awareness is low among pregnant women and midwives. Education will be required to support successful implementation of routine antenatal vaccination. Research is needed to understand reasons for vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women and HCPs, particularly midwives.

INTRODUCTION:Uptake rates of antenatal vaccination remain suboptimal. Our aims were to determine (1) the acceptability of routine vaccination among pregnant women, (2) the confidence of maternity healthcare professionals (HCPs) discussing vaccination and (3) HCP opinion regarding the optimum healthcare site for vaccine administration.METHODS:Separate questionnaires for pregnant women and HCPs were distributed within 4 national health service (NHS) trusts in South England (July 2017 to January 2018).RESULTS:Responses from 314 pregnant women and 204 HCPs (18% obstetricians, 75% midwives, 7% unidentified) were analyzed. Previous/intended uptake of influenza and pertussis vaccination was 78% and 92%, respectively. The commonest reason for declining vaccination was feared side effects for their child. White British women (79%) were significantly more accepting of influenza [85% vs. 61%; odds ratio (OR) 3.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.67-6.32] and pertussis vaccination (96% vs. 83%; OR 4.83; 95% CI: 1.77-13.19) compared with nonwhite British women. Among HCPs, 25% were slightly or not at all confident discussing vaccination. Obstetricians felt significantly more confident discussing pertussis vaccination than midwives (68% vs. 55% were very/moderately confident; OR 2.05; 95% CI: 1.02-4.12). Among HCPs, 53%, 25% and 16% thought vaccines should be administered in primary care (general practice), community midwifery and in hospital, respectively.CONCLUSION:Misconceptions exist regarding safety/efficacy of antenatal vaccination, and framing information towards the child's safety may increase uptake. Education of HCPs is essential, and vaccine promotion should be incorporated into routine antenatal care, with an emphasis on women from ethnic minorities. Administration of vaccines in primary care presents logistical barriers; however, support for alternative sites appears low among HCPs.