Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control guidelines, prolonged rupture of membranes mandates intrapartum antimicrobial prophylaxis for group B Streptococcus whenever maternal GBS[1] status is unknown.

Objectives: To evaluate the local incidence, early detection and outcome of early-onset GBS sepsis in 35–42 week old neonates born after PROM[2] to women with unknown GBS status who were not given intrapartum antimicrobial prophylaxis.

Methods: During a 1 year period, we studied all neonates born beyond 35 weeks gestation with maternal PROM ≥ 18 hours, unknown maternal GBS status and without prior administration of IAP[3]. Complete blood count, C-reactive protein, blood culture and polymerase chain reaction amplification of bacterial 16S rRNA gene were performed in blood samples collected immediately after birth. Unfavorable outcome was defined by one or more of the following: GBS bacteremia, clinical signs of sepsis, or positive PCR[4].

Results:  Of the 3616 liveborns 212 (5.9%) met the inclusion criteria. Only 12 (5.7%) of these neonates presented signs suggestive of sepsis. PCR was negative in all cases. Fifty-eight neonates (27.4%) had CRP[5] > 1.0 mg/dl and/or complete blood count abnormalities, but these were not significantly associated with unfavorable outcome. Early-onset GBS sepsis occurred in one neonate in this high risk group (1/212 = 0.47%, 95% CI 0.012–2.6). 

Conclusions: In this single-institution study, the incidence of early-onset GBS sepsis in neonates born after PROM of ≥ 18 hours, unknown maternal GBS status and no intrapartum antimicrobial prophylaxis was 0.47%.

Objectives: To determine to what extent the current Centers for Disease Control guidelines are practiced in Israel, the reasons for their adoption or rejection, and the need for local official guidelines.

Methods: A telephone questionnaire was conducted of all 27 delivery units in Israel. Answers were obtained from 26, either from the clinical director or the senior obstetrician in charge at the time of the interview.

Results: Only in 2 of the 26 delivery units (8%) are the CDC[1] guidelines adhered to exactly; in 6 units they are deliberately rejected, and in 8 units they are not practiced, although they are allegedly implemented. Thus, the CDC guidelines are not practiced in 14 delivery units (54%). Medico-legal consideration is the sole or major reason for adopting these guidelines in 80% (16/20) of the delivery units where they are seemingly implemented. In the majority of these units (18/20) there is readiness to abandon current practice, should local guidelines differ from those of the CDC, provided that local guidelines are issued by an authoritative source.

Conclusion: CDC guidelines are either deliberately rejected or incorrectly practiced in most Israeli delivery units. The medico-legal argument is one of the main reasons for practicing these guidelines. Since the CDC guidelines probably do not apply in Israel, official local guidelines are urgently needed.

_______________________

[1] CDC = Centers for  Disease Control