[Group B streptococcus in the antenatal clinic and in the delivery room: a matter of systematic attitude].

OBJECTIVES:We wanted to evaluate the compliance to the local recommendations, similar to the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and prevention) recommendations launched in 1996, for the prevention of perinatal group B streptococcal (GBS) disease in the clinical practice of a academic maternity and to identify the causes of missed screening and antibiotic prophylaxis. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Retrospective study of 1249 consecutive pregnancies between 1st January and 31th August 2002. The screening methods for GBS colonisation were the culture of rectovaginal swabs collected between 35 and 37 weeks and/or a rapid antigenic screening performed on a vaginal swab collected at the patient's admission for labor. RESULTS:Rate of global screening was very high (97.8%): 28.8% of antenatal screening versus 90.3% during labor. An appropriate antibiotic prophylaxis was administered to only one-third of positive women when the screening was performed at admission to the labor room, whereas two-thirds of GBS-positive women screened between 35 and 37 weeks received their antibiotic prophylaxis. 2.4%o of the newborns were infected and 2.9% were colonized. Among the different risk factors, intrapartum fever was more often associated with maternal GBS colonisation. The observed sensitivity of the rapide antigenic test was 20.4%. CONCLUSION:Compliance to guidelines is sometimes difficult in the clinical practice of an academic maternity. In our hands the rapid test for GBS screening had low sensitivity. The analysis of these data led to introducing a computerized algorithm in our maternity to improve the prevention of perinatal group B streptococcal disease.