Back

Adoption and Real-World Effectiveness of Adjunctive Azithromycin for Unscheduled Cesarean Delivery: A National Difference-in-Differences Analysis

Freret, T. S.; Litman, E.; Wen, T.; Guise, J.-M.; Little, S. E.; Clapp, M. A.

2026-05-08 obstetrics and gynecology
10.64898/2026.05.07.26352377 medRxiv
Show abstract

ImportanceCesarean delivery is the most common surgery in the US with more than 1 million performed each year; it is also the most significant risk factor for postpartum infection. The Cesarean Section Optimal Antibiotic Prophylaxis trial demonstrated that the addition of azithromycin at the time of cesarean birth performed in labor reduces postpartum infection. ObjectiveTo determine the real-world adoption and effect of this trial on clinical practice and postpartum infections among U.S. pregnant persons undergoing cesarean delivery in labor. DesignDifference-in-differences analysis from 2013-2024. SettingPopulation-based, patient-level analysis using Epic Cosmos, a large longitudinal national electronic health record database of patients seen in health systems using Epic. ParticipantsPregnant individuals who received outpatient prenatal care in the system, who labored and gave birth to a liveborn singleton infant at 24-43 weeks of gestation were included. Exclusion criteria included unknown mode of delivery and intraamniotic infection. ExposuresThe treatment group included those delivered by cesarean and the control group included those who delivered vaginally. The pre-period was defined as 2013-2016, excluding a washout period from trial publication until December 31, 2016, and the post-period was defined from 2017-2024. Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcomes were perioperative azithromycin administration and postpartum infection within 6 weeks of delivery. Results1,663,341 participants were included in the final analysis. In the pre- and post-periods, azithromycin was administered in 0.01% and 0.04% of vaginal births and in 2.2% and 39.6% of cesarean births, respectively. In the pre- and post-periods, postpartum infection occurred in 2.0% and 2.7% of vaginal births and 9.2% and 8.0% of cesarean births. In the adjusted difference-in-difference analysis, the trial resulted in an absolute increase in azithromycin use by 37.6 percentage points (pp) (95% CI: 33.1 to 42.2 pp); postpartum infection decreased by 2.0 pp (95% CI: -2.5 to -1.4 pp), a relative decrease of 20%. Conclusions and RelevanceOutside the clinical trial setting, this study provides evidence that azithromycin significantly reduces postpartum infection among pregnant persons undergoing a cesarean delivery in labor. Key PointsO_ST_ABSQuestionC_ST_ABSDid evidence from the Cesarean Section Optimal Antibiotic Prophylaxis (C/SOAP) trial change real-world clinical practice and decrease postpartum infections among U.S. pregnant persons who underwent a cesarean delivery in labor? FindingsIn this difference-in-differences analysis of 1.6 million births, azithromycin use increased 37.6 percentage points and postpartum infections decreased by 2.0 percentage points following the C/SOAP trial. MeaningOutside the clinical trial setting, this study provides evidence that azithromycin significantly reduces postpartum infection among individuals having a cesarean delivery in labor.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
17.3%
2
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.1%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 19%
9.9%
4
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 34%
4.8%
5
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
20 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.2%
50% of probability mass above
6
BMJ
49 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.9%
7
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
3.9%
8
Pain
70 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.9%
9
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.5%
10
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 6%
3.5%
11
Journal of Medical Economics
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.0%
12
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 55%
1.8%
13
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
14
BMJ Open Quality
15 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
15
Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety
13 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.6%
16
Healthcare
16 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.5%
17
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.3%
18
Vaccine
189 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
19
JAMA
17 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.2%
20
Canadian Medical Association Journal
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
21
eClinicalMedicine
55 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
22
American Journal of Psychiatry
20 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
23
Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal
16 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
24
JAMIA Open
37 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
25
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.6%
26
Journal of Clinical Pathology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.6%