|Articles|November 25, 2016

Could New Perinatal Hepatitis B Prevention Laws Save Infants from Premature Death?

Author(s)Kristi Rosa

A recent study assessed if laws pertaining to the screening and reporting of hepatitis B may increase identification in pregnant women and thus, allow for more infants who have been exposed to the virus to receive post-exposure prophylaxis.

*Updated on 12/05/2016 at 11:06 AM EST

Because mother-to-child transmission (MTCT) of hepatitis B virus (HBV) is considered preventable, the standard of care in the United States is to screen pregnant women for HBV. Identification of HBV-positive pregnant women is all the more important because then healthcare providers can administer postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) to HBV-exposed infants as soon as possible. Post-exposure prophylaxis can prevent MTCT and ultimately save a child’s life; however, the window of opportunity to administer it is very small.

In 90% of infants, HBV progresses into chronic HBV, and 25% of these infants end up dying due to liver failure or liver cancer. By administering PEP to HBV-exposed infants within 12 hours after birth, 95% of cases of MTCT can be prevented. With the idea that laws pertaining to screening and reporting may increase identification of HBV in pregnant women, thereby allowing for more exposed infants to receive PEP, in 2014, researchers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Public Health Law Program took a closer look at laws within the United States and the District of Columbia, current through December 31, 2013, related to HBV infection in general and HBV-positive pregnant women in particular.

The questions that the researchers sought to answer were:

• Does the jurisdiction require screening of pregnant women specifically for HBV infection or hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)?

• Does the jurisdiction require reporting of HBV infection or HBsAg in pregnant women?

• Does the jurisdiction require general reporting of HBV infection?

• Does the jurisdiction require reporting the pregnancy status of women who have HBV infection or who test positive for HBsAg?

In order to explore all of the different laws and statutes pertaining to the screening and reporting of HBV infection, the researchers used WestLawNext, a legal research service. They found that although all states require HBV cases to be reported, only 26 require HBV screening for pregnant women. Additionally, whereas 23 states require public health reporting of pregnant women who test positive for HBV, only 12 require reporting pregnancy status in HBV-positive women. Not knowing that status makes it harder for the healthcare community seeking to reduce MTCT of HBV, such as through the Perinatal Hepatitis B Prevention Program, whose goal is to identify and assist all HBV-positive pregnant women within their particular jurisdiction. According to the authors, there were a number of limitations to their assessment: the researchers did not closely analyze the adherence of each state to these laws and statutes, nor did they note that a number of the laws may have changed since their assessment.

The authors concluded, “As new laws are considered to reduce MTCT of HBV infection, several provisions to increase the effectiveness of screening and reporting could be considered. Requiring all pregnant women to be screened for HBsAg at either the initial prenatal visit or at admission for delivery if there is no record of test results, and reporting pregnancy status in HBsAg-positive women, could increase the number of women identified for prenatal intervention. Further, requiring reporting of positive test results within 1 day could increase the number of women identified in time for intervention.”

With new laws that focus on increasing the identification of HBV-positive pregnant women, public health officials can intervene within the limited window of opportunity they have and ultimately save a number of infants from HBV-related deaths.


Related to this article

How The Food Safety Surveillance Infrastructure Works in the US
In the first episode of our news series looking at the food safety network, Lynette Johnston, PhD, offers insights into how the federal government surveillance infrastructure operates, and how epidemiologists serve as food detectives in determining bacterial pathogens and potential foodborne outbreaks.
Ebola and the Ongoing Tale of US Failures
In mid-May, as the world was still grappling with an unexpected hantavirus outbreak aboard a tourism vessel, news broke of an Ebola outbreak in the Ituri Province of the Democratic Republic of the Congo spanning at least 3 health zones, including Bunia, Rwampara, and Mongbwalu.
This Week's Top 5 Infectious Disease News Stories: September 12-September 18, 2026
In this week's top infectious disease stories, a Pennsylvania teen became the state's fourth measles death in weeks, the CDC reported a 17% summer surge in rabies exposure calls, new research revisited whether cefepime raises mortality risk, a multihospital review examined ceftriaxone's safety after state alerts, and examining Legionella pneumonia diagnostics.
Measles Update: September 18, 2026
The latest CDC numbers show a 5.37% increase of measles cases from week-to-week. In Pennsylvania, the fourth measles-related death was reported in 2026. Additionally, the CDC has made a change in the way it will report deaths.
CDC Responds to Surge in Rabies Exposures
A "Clinician Outreach" from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in April anticipated an increase in rabies exposures, and the striking surge in case reports this summer prompted a recent health advisory alert from the federal agency.
New Diagnositics for Legionella Pneumonia May Streamline Care Continuum
Reported cases of Legionnaires’ disease have been on the rise for the past decade, and identifying Legionella bacteria requires specialized testing in the microbiology lab. Here is a clinical overview of Legionella bacteria, including required testing, treatment, and reporting to public health officials.
Ceftriaxone Safety: Separating Signal From Risk
A retrospective multihospital study found that severe adverse events occurred at similarly low rates with ceftriaxone and other IV cephalosporins suggesting there is no evidence to support avoiding ceftriaxone despite recent health department safety alerts.