Bernard, Matthew E.

Over 37% of pregnant women report excessive daytime sleepiness or hypersomnia during the first trimester, and commonly throughout the remaining trimesters of pregnancy and the postpartum period. The clinical presentation and symptoms of central disorders of hypersomnolence (CDH) such as narcolepsy, idiopathic hypersomnia, or excessive daytime sleepiness secondary to shift work or obstructive sleep apnea may be confounded by physiological changes in sleep architecture and hormonal fluctuations occurring during pregnancy. These overlapping features may cause delays in diagnosis and treatment, impacting quality of life, maternal functioning, and overall health. Management of CDH during pregnancy and lactation requires careful consideration of maternal benefits, potential side effects of medications and fetal and neonatal safety. Here, we present a case of idiopathic hypersomnia and detail management and outcomes during pregnancy and lactation. We briefly review the existing literature on prevalence, pathophysiological mechanisms, diagnostic challenges, objective findings, and risks posed by CDH in pregnancy and lactation. In this narrative review for primary care clinicians, we also summarize currently available evidence regarding the efficacy, teratogenic and other risks of pharmacologic agents used in the treatment of CDH in pregnancy and lactation. Lastly, we provide a clinical algorithm for management of CDH during pregnancy and lactation.

Objectives: To assess how social risk factors and socioeconomic status (SES) affect health care costs at a large, integrated health system of 45 clinics in Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed administrative patient cost data from January 1 through December 31, 2022. Social risk factors (lack of financial resources, food insecurity, intimate partner violence, unmet transportation needs, and housing instability) were determined with patient questionnaires. Cost z -scores were compared across all risk-factor quartiles. We used a housing-based measure to objectively determine SES. Results: We analyzed data from 410 624 patients empaneled with 689 family medicine clinicians. Self-reported risk factor data were incomplete for 219 321 patients. Costs were higher for those with higher social risk (mean cost z -score: high risk = 0.38, low risk = 0.11; P < .001). In addition, higher costs were associated with increasing age, greater medical complexity (higher Adjusted Clinical Group scores), White race, and lack of financial resources. Although we observed geographic variations in cost, urban and rural locations did not have significant cost differences. Costs were similar across all quartiles of SES, and the absolute difference in cost z -scores between the highest and lowest SES quartiles was only 0.04. The multivariate analysis, which adjusted for age, medical complexity, race, sex, and objective SES, showed that these specific associations were substantially decreased and no longer significantly associated with mean cost z -scores. Conclusions: Patient-reported social risk factors were significantly associated with increased cost of care in a large, multispecialty health system in the midwestern US. These associations were decreased in the multivariate analysis. Results should be interpreted cautiously for readers outside the midwestern US, given potential responder bias and the racial homogeneity (92% White) of the study cohort.