# Screening for infections in pregnancy (syphilis, hepatitis B, bacteriuria)

Intervention · id `maternal:prenatal-infection-screening` · Maternal & Newborn Atlas · release `fc5a600ec7387e71` (public)

> General information from published sources, not medical advice, and not reviewed by clinicians. Check the cited source before relying on anything here.

The atlas's own text and curation may be reused under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/): credit the atlas, and do not use it commercially. See the atlas About page. Text quoted from a source stays under that source's own terms, given as the source's reuse\_basis. The atlas's reuse terms do not cover it. The downloads list each quotation with its source in third\_party\_quotations.

Browse, life stage: Pregnancy  
Browse, care area: Routine pregnancy care  

## In plain language

Early in pregnancy, blood and urine tests look for infections that can harm a mother or her baby. US guidance (USPSTF) advises screening all pregnant women for syphilis early in pregnancy, screening for hepatitis B at the first prenatal visit, and screening pregnant people for bacteria in the urine without symptoms (asymptomatic bacteriuria) with a urine culture. Untreated syphilis can pass to the baby and is linked with stillbirth and newborn death. This page covers these three infections only.

## Technical summary

Three separate USPSTF statements, each with its own population and grade, recorded as claims: syphilis (reaffirmed 2018, A), hepatitis B (reaffirmed 2019, A; PubMed links an erratum that was not read) and asymptomatic bacteriuria (2019, B for pregnant persons). The bacteriuria statement also recommends against screening in nonpregnant adults, outside this page. The atlas has no separate records for the three infections yet, so there are no clinical links from this page to conditions. Other infections screened in pregnancy, such as HIV, are not covered.

## Claims, with the population each applies to

## Context: Pregnant women (USPSTF 2018 syphilis screening)

Recipient: Maternal; Population: All pregnant women.; Care setting: Not stated in the PubMed abstract; Geography: United States (statement of the US Preventive Services Task Force); the abstract names no country.; Life stage: Pregnancy, early; Gestational age: Not reported; Postnatal age: Not reported; Follow-up: Not applicable (recommendation context)

### The USPSTF recommends early screening for syphilis infection in all pregnant women. It grades this an A recommendation. In 2018 it reaffirmed its earlier conclusion that there is convincing evidence that screening for syphilis infection in pregnant women provides substantial benefit, because effective antibiotic treatment can prevent congenital syphilis and significantly decrease adverse pregnancy outcomes, with small associated harms.

- Category: Recommendation
- Evidence stage: Guidance
- Certainty: Certainty not assessed
- Applies to: Recipient: Maternal; Population: All pregnant women.; Care setting: Not stated in the PubMed abstract; Geography: United States (statement of the US Preventive Services Task Force); the abstract names no country.; Life stage: Pregnancy, early; Gestational age: Not reported; Postnatal age: Not reported; Follow-up: Not applicable (recommendation context)
- Limitations: This was a reaffirmation based on an evidence update, not a new full review. Only the PubMed abstract was read. The abstract does not name the screening tests.
- Last checked: 2026-10-14
- Sources:
  1. Supports: Screening for Syphilis Infection in Pregnant Women: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement (Publication, edition PubMed record (abstract and bibliographic data) from NCBI E-utilities, fetched 2026-10-14. The full text and the version of record were not fetched.) <https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.11785>
     Locator: Abstract, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION, sentence 1. Retrieved 2026-10-14T18:18:21Z. Source state: Current. Snapshot hash: 03ab9b6c652b4643a9f623a2864d08fa766b4a723ae9b22733b61b6d352fb778.
     How it applies: PubMed abstract of the USPSTF 2018 reaffirmation.
  2. Supports: Screening for Syphilis Infection in Pregnant Women: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement (Publication, edition PubMed record (abstract and bibliographic data) from NCBI E-utilities, fetched 2026-10-14. The full text and the version of record were not fetched.) <https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.11785>
     Locator: Abstract, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION, sentence 2. Retrieved 2026-10-14T18:18:21Z. Source state: Current. Snapshot hash: 03ab9b6c652b4643a9f623a2864d08fa766b4a723ae9b22733b61b6d352fb778.
     How it applies: PubMed abstract of the USPSTF 2018 reaffirmation.
  3. Background: Screening for Syphilis Infection in Pregnant Women: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement (Publication, edition PubMed record (abstract and bibliographic data) from NCBI E-utilities, fetched 2026-10-14. The full text and the version of record were not fetched.) <https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.11785>
     Locator: Abstract, FINDINGS, sentence 2. Retrieved 2026-10-14T18:18:21Z. Source state: Current. Snapshot hash: 03ab9b6c652b4643a9f623a2864d08fa766b4a723ae9b22733b61b6d352fb778.
     How it applies: Findings of the evidence update and its objective.
  4. Background: Screening for Syphilis Infection in Pregnant Women: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement (Publication, edition PubMed record (abstract and bibliographic data) from NCBI E-utilities, fetched 2026-10-14. The full text and the version of record were not fetched.) <https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.11785>
     Locator: Abstract, FINDINGS, sentence 3. Retrieved 2026-10-14T18:18:21Z. Source state: Current. Snapshot hash: 03ab9b6c652b4643a9f623a2864d08fa766b4a723ae9b22733b61b6d352fb778.
     How it applies: Findings of the evidence update and its objective.
  5. Background: Screening for Syphilis Infection in Pregnant Women: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement (Publication, edition PubMed record (abstract and bibliographic data) from NCBI E-utilities, fetched 2026-10-14. The full text and the version of record were not fetched.) <https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.11785>
     Locator: Abstract, OBJECTIVE, sentence 1. Retrieved 2026-10-14T18:18:21Z. Source state: Current. Snapshot hash: 03ab9b6c652b4643a9f623a2864d08fa766b4a723ae9b22733b61b6d352fb778.
     How it applies: Findings of the evidence update and its objective.

## Context: Pregnant persons without symptoms of a urinary tract infection (USPSTF 2019 bacteriuria screening)

Recipient: Maternal; Population: Pregnant persons of any age without signs and symptoms of a urinary tract infection.; Care setting: Not stated in the PubMed abstract; Geography: United States (statement of the US Preventive Services Task Force); the abstract names no country.; Life stage: Pregnancy; Gestational age: Not reported; Postnatal age: Not reported; Follow-up: Not applicable (recommendation context)

### The USPSTF recommends screening pregnant persons for asymptomatic bacteriuria using urine culture. It grades this a B recommendation and concludes with moderate certainty that screening for and treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria in pregnant persons has a moderate net benefit in reducing perinatal complications.

- Category: Recommendation
- Evidence stage: Guidance
- Certainty: Certainty not assessed
- Applies to: Recipient: Maternal; Population: Pregnant persons of any age without signs and symptoms of a urinary tract infection.; Care setting: Not stated in the PubMed abstract; Geography: United States (statement of the US Preventive Services Task Force); the abstract names no country.; Life stage: Pregnancy; Gestational age: Not reported; Postnatal age: Not reported; Follow-up: Not applicable (recommendation context)
- Limitations: The same USPSTF statement recommends against screening for asymptomatic bacteriuria in nonpregnant adults (a D recommendation); that is outside this claim. The abstract finds the harms of treatment (adverse effects of antibiotics and changes to the microbiome) to be at least small in magnitude. The PubMed abstract prints each grade after its statement, so the B appears at the start of the next sentence. USPSTF certainty levels are the task force’s own wording and not a GRADE rating.
- Last checked: 2026-10-14
- Sources:
  1. Supports: Screening for Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement (Publication, edition PubMed record (abstract and bibliographic data) from NCBI E-utilities, fetched 2026-10-14. The full text and the version of record were not fetched.) <https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.13069>
     Locator: Abstract, RECOMMENDATIONS, sentence 1. Retrieved 2026-10-14T18:18:21Z. Source state: Current. Snapshot hash: d475c432e46d48469278279504d9e7b7fcf19b2a69d977e4702b6d5481bf2caf.
     How it applies: PubMed abstract of the USPSTF 2019 statement.
  2. Supports: Screening for Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement (Publication, edition PubMed record (abstract and bibliographic data) from NCBI E-utilities, fetched 2026-10-14. The full text and the version of record were not fetched.) <https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.13069>
     Locator: Abstract, RECOMMENDATIONS, sentence 2. Retrieved 2026-10-14T18:18:21Z. Source state: Current. Snapshot hash: d475c432e46d48469278279504d9e7b7fcf19b2a69d977e4702b6d5481bf2caf.
     How it applies: PubMed abstract of the USPSTF 2019 statement.
  3. Supports: Screening for Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement (Publication, edition PubMed record (abstract and bibliographic data) from NCBI E-utilities, fetched 2026-10-14. The full text and the version of record were not fetched.) <https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.13069>
     Locator: Abstract, EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT, sentence 1. Retrieved 2026-10-14T18:18:21Z. Source state: Current. Snapshot hash: d475c432e46d48469278279504d9e7b7fcf19b2a69d977e4702b6d5481bf2caf.
     How it applies: PubMed abstract of the USPSTF 2019 statement.
  4. Background: Screening for Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement (Publication, edition PubMed record (abstract and bibliographic data) from NCBI E-utilities, fetched 2026-10-14. The full text and the version of record were not fetched.) <https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.13069>
     Locator: Abstract, POPULATION, sentence 1. Retrieved 2026-10-14T18:18:21Z. Source state: Current. Snapshot hash: d475c432e46d48469278279504d9e7b7fcf19b2a69d977e4702b6d5481bf2caf.
     How it applies: Population, harms of treatment and background.
  5. Background: Screening for Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement (Publication, edition PubMed record (abstract and bibliographic data) from NCBI E-utilities, fetched 2026-10-14. The full text and the version of record were not fetched.) <https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.13069>
     Locator: Abstract, EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT, sentence 3. Retrieved 2026-10-14T18:18:21Z. Source state: Current. Snapshot hash: d475c432e46d48469278279504d9e7b7fcf19b2a69d977e4702b6d5481bf2caf.
     How it applies: Population, harms of treatment and background.
  6. Background: Screening for Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement (Publication, edition PubMed record (abstract and bibliographic data) from NCBI E-utilities, fetched 2026-10-14. The full text and the version of record were not fetched.) <https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.13069>
     Locator: Abstract, EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT, sentence 5. Retrieved 2026-10-14T18:18:21Z. Source state: Current. Snapshot hash: d475c432e46d48469278279504d9e7b7fcf19b2a69d977e4702b6d5481bf2caf.
     How it applies: Population, harms of treatment and background.
  7. Background: Screening for Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement (Publication, edition PubMed record (abstract and bibliographic data) from NCBI E-utilities, fetched 2026-10-14. The full text and the version of record were not fetched.) <https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.13069>
     Locator: Abstract, IMPORTANCE, sentence 2. Retrieved 2026-10-14T18:18:21Z. Source state: Current. Snapshot hash: d475c432e46d48469278279504d9e7b7fcf19b2a69d977e4702b6d5481bf2caf.
     How it applies: Population, harms of treatment and background.

## Context: Pregnant women at the first prenatal visit (USPSTF 2019 hepatitis B screening)

Recipient: Maternal; Population: Pregnant women, screened at their first prenatal visit.; Care setting: Not stated in the PubMed abstract; Geography: United States (statement of the US Preventive Services Task Force); the abstract names no country.; Life stage: Pregnancy, first prenatal visit; Gestational age: Not reported; Postnatal age: Not reported; Follow-up: Not applicable (recommendation context)

### The USPSTF recommends screening for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in pregnant women at their first prenatal visit. It grades this an A recommendation. In 2019 it reaffirmed its previous conclusion that there is convincing evidence that screening for HBV infection in pregnant women provides substantial benefit. The abstract says interventions are effective for preventing perinatal transmission.

- Category: Recommendation
- Evidence stage: Guidance
- Certainty: Certainty not assessed
- Applies to: Recipient: Maternal; Population: Pregnant women, screened at their first prenatal visit.; Care setting: Not stated in the PubMed abstract; Geography: United States (statement of the US Preventive Services Task Force); the abstract names no country.; Life stage: Pregnancy, first prenatal visit; Gestational age: Not reported; Postnatal age: Not reported; Follow-up: Not applicable (recommendation context)
- Limitations: This was a reaffirmation based on an evidence update. PubMed links a published erratum (PMID 31528989, titled Incorrect Language in Figure and Text); its PubMed and PMC records hold only the title and no correction text (the correction is in the journal PDF, which was not fetched), so whether it changes anything in this claim is not known. Only the PubMed abstract of the statement was read.
- Last checked: 2026-10-14
- Source problem: a cited source is corrected. Check the sources before relying on this claim.
- Sources:
  1. Supports: Screening for Hepatitis B Virus Infection in Pregnant Women: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement (Publication, edition PubMed record (abstract and bibliographic data) from NCBI E-utilities, fetched 2026-10-14. The full text and the version of record were not fetched. PubMed links a published erratum (PMID 31528989, titled Incorrect Language in Figure and Text); its text has no abstract and was not read, so the statement is cited as the PubMed abstract gives it.) <https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.9365>
     Locator: Abstract, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION, sentence 1. Retrieved 2026-10-14T18:18:41Z. Source state: Corrected. Snapshot hash: a68c5c6e8567d436309381d80c080e91f88e728099c93d678718937898907853.
     How it applies: PubMed abstract of the USPSTF 2019 reaffirmation.
  2. Supports: Screening for Hepatitis B Virus Infection in Pregnant Women: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement (Publication, edition PubMed record (abstract and bibliographic data) from NCBI E-utilities, fetched 2026-10-14. The full text and the version of record were not fetched. PubMed links a published erratum (PMID 31528989, titled Incorrect Language in Figure and Text); its text has no abstract and was not read, so the statement is cited as the PubMed abstract gives it.) <https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.9365>
     Locator: Abstract, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION, sentence 2. Retrieved 2026-10-14T18:18:41Z. Source state: Corrected. Snapshot hash: a68c5c6e8567d436309381d80c080e91f88e728099c93d678718937898907853.
     How it applies: PubMed abstract of the USPSTF 2019 reaffirmation.
  3. Background: Screening for Hepatitis B Virus Infection in Pregnant Women: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement (Publication, edition PubMed record (abstract and bibliographic data) from NCBI E-utilities, fetched 2026-10-14. The full text and the version of record were not fetched. PubMed links a published erratum (PMID 31528989, titled Incorrect Language in Figure and Text); its text has no abstract and was not read, so the statement is cited as the PubMed abstract gives it.) <https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.9365>
     Locator: Abstract, FINDINGS, sentence 2. Retrieved 2026-10-14T18:18:41Z. Source state: Corrected. Snapshot hash: a68c5c6e8567d436309381d80c080e91f88e728099c93d678718937898907853.
     How it applies: Findings of the evidence update and its objective.
  4. Background: Screening for Hepatitis B Virus Infection in Pregnant Women: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement (Publication, edition PubMed record (abstract and bibliographic data) from NCBI E-utilities, fetched 2026-10-14. The full text and the version of record were not fetched. PubMed links a published erratum (PMID 31528989, titled Incorrect Language in Figure and Text); its text has no abstract and was not read, so the statement is cited as the PubMed abstract gives it.) <https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.9365>
     Locator: Abstract, FINDINGS, sentence 4. Retrieved 2026-10-14T18:18:41Z. Source state: Corrected. Snapshot hash: a68c5c6e8567d436309381d80c080e91f88e728099c93d678718937898907853.
     How it applies: Findings of the evidence update and its objective.
  5. Background: Screening for Hepatitis B Virus Infection in Pregnant Women: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement (Publication, edition PubMed record (abstract and bibliographic data) from NCBI E-utilities, fetched 2026-10-14. The full text and the version of record were not fetched. PubMed links a published erratum (PMID 31528989, titled Incorrect Language in Figure and Text); its text has no abstract and was not read, so the statement is cited as the PubMed abstract gives it.) <https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.9365>
     Locator: Abstract, OBJECTIVE, sentence 1. Retrieved 2026-10-14T18:18:41Z. Source state: Corrected. Snapshot hash: a68c5c6e8567d436309381d80c080e91f88e728099c93d678718937898907853.
     How it applies: Findings of the evidence update and its objective.
  6. Background: Incorrect Language in Figure and Text (Publication, edition PubMed record (abstract and bibliographic data) from NCBI E-utilities, fetched 2026-10-14. The full text and the version of record were not fetched.) <https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.12797>
     Locator: ArticleTitle. Retrieved 2026-10-14T18:24:06Z. Source state: Current. Snapshot hash: c2e005824fe0aedadd28923eafb606719da88d68ca2eca67802d488d53b85015.
     How it applies: Title of the linked erratum; the erratum text itself was not read.

## Connected pages

- Filed under this front: Screening and tests (`maternal:front-screening-and-tests`)
- Screening tests offered at the first antenatal visit: Antenatal (prenatal) care (`maternal:antenatal-care`)

## Provenance

Content hash: 13f080724be42333bc0dc91dd50828fb4a408d040920aa25defc8385f37f870c
Last substantive edit: 2026-10-14
Evidence last checked: 2026-10-14
