Potentially avoidable perinatal deaths in Denmark and Sweden 1991

Cause of and factors associated with stillbirth: a systematic review of classification systems

INTRODUCTION

An estimated 2.6 million stillbirths occur worldwide each year. A standardized classification system setting out possible cause of death and contributing factors is useful to help obtain comparative data across different settings. We undertook a systematic review of stillbirth classification systems to highlight their strengths and weaknesses for practitioners and policymakers.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted a systematic search and review of the literature to identify the classification systems used to aggregate information for stillbirth and perinatal deaths. Narrative synthesis was used to compare the range and depth of information required to apply the systems, and the different categories provided for cause of and factors contributing to stillbirth.

RESULTS

A total of 118 documents were screened; 31 classification systems were included, of which six were designed specifically for stillbirth, 14 for perinatal death, three systems included neonatal deaths and two included infant deaths. Most (27/31) were developed in and first tested using data obtained from high-income settings. All systems required information from clinical records. One-third of the classification systems (11/31) included information obtained from histology or autopsy. The percentage where cause of death remained unknown ranged from 0.39% using the Nordic-Baltic classification to 46.4% using the Keeling system.

CONCLUSION

Over time, classification systems have become more complex. The success of application is dependent on the availability of detailed clinical information and laboratory investigations. Systems that adopt a layered approach allow for classification of cause of death to a broad as well as to a more detailed level.

Neonatal deaths and injuries

BACKGROUND

It is rare for babies to die or be injured during birth in Norway. We aimed to investigate whether maternity care was inadequate in cases reported to the Norwegian Board of Health Supervision and to single out areas in maternity care where there is potential for improvement.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

The material consists of cases reported to the Norwegian Board of Health Supervision in the three-year period 2006-2008 in which babies died or were severely injured during delivery. We recorded data on: maternity unit, fetal monitoring, delivery method, personnel involved and type of inadequate maternity care.

RESULTS

The material consists of 81 cases. Babies died during or after deliver in 58 cases and were severely injured in 23 cases. The health trusts reported 42 of these events to the Board of Health Supervision; the remainder were reported by the patient ombudsman or the parents. There was inadequate fetal monitoring in 68 % of the births and delayed delivery in 67 %. A gynaecological specialist was not called for 44 % of the births. The number of cases of injuries in relation to the number of deliveries reported to the Board of Health Supervision was significantly higher for small maternity units (< 1000 births per year) than for larger units.

INTERPRETATION

Doctors and midwives need a better knowledge of fetal monitoring. Maternity units must develop sound procedures for singling out high-risk births, use of fetal monitoring, calling for a doctor and reporting to the Board of Health Supervision. Exercises in dealing with acute situations should be held. Small maternity units appear to be most vulnerable to adverse events.

Stillbirth differences according to regions of origin: an analysis of the German perinatal database, 2004-2007

BACKGROUND

Stillbirth is a sensitive indicator for access to, and quality of health care and social services in a society. If a particular population group e.g. migrants experiences higher rates of stillbirth, this might be an indication of social deprivation or barriers to health care. This study examines differences in risk of stillbirth for women of different regions of origin compared to women from Germany in order to identify high risk groups/target groups for prevention strategies.

METHODS

We used the BQS dataset routinely compiled to examine perinatal outcomes in Germany nationwide. Participation of hospitals and completeness of data has been about 98% in recent years. Data on all live births and stillbirths were obtained for the period 2004 to 2007 (N = 2,670,048). We calculated crude and stratified mortality rates as well as corresponding relative mortality risks.

RESULTS

A significantly elevated stillbirth rate was found for women from the Middle East and North Africa (incl. Turkey) (RR 1.34, CI 1.22-1.55). The risk was slightly attenuated for low SES. An elevated risk was also found for women from Asia (RR 1.18, CI 1.02-1.65) and from Mediterranean countries (RR 1.14, CI 0.93-1.28). No considerable differences either in use and timing of antenatal care or preterm birth and low birthweight were observed between migrant and non-migrant women. After stratification for light for gestational age, the relative risk of stillbirth for women from the Middle East/North Africa increased to 1.63 (95% CI 1.25-2.13). When adjusted for preterm births with low birthweight, women from Eastern Europe and the Middle East/North Africa experienced a 26% (43%) higher risk compared with women from Germany.

CONCLUSIONS

We found differences in risk of stillbirth among women from Middle East/North Africa, especially in association with low SES and low birthweight for gestational age. Our findings suggest a need for developing and evaluating socially and culturally sensitive health promotion and prevention programmes for this group. The findings should also stimulate discussion about the quality and appropriateness of antenatal and perinatal care of pregnant women and newborns with migrant backgrounds.

Stillbirths: Where? When? Why? How to make the data count?

Despite increasing attention and investment for maternal, neonatal, and child health, stillbirths remain invisible-not counted in the Millennium Development Goals, nor tracked by the UN, nor in the Global Burden of Disease metrics. At least 2·65 million stillbirths (uncertainty range 2·08 million to 3·79 million) were estimated worldwide in 2008 (≥1000 g birthweight or ≥28 weeks of gestation). 98% of stillbirths occur in low-income and middle-income countries, and numbers vary from 2·0 per 1000 total births in Finland to more than 40 per 1000 total births in Nigeria and Pakistan. Worldwide, 67% of stillbirths occur in rural families, 55% in rural sub-Saharan Africa and south Asia, where skilled birth attendance and caesarean sections are much lower than that for urban births. In total, an estimated 1·19 million (range 0·82 million to 1·97 million) intrapartum stillbirths occur yearly. Most intrapartum stillbirths are associated with obstetric emergencies, whereas antepartum stillbirths are associated with maternal infections and fetal growth restriction. National estimates of causes of stillbirths are scarce, and multiple (>35) classification systems impede international comparison. Immediate data improvements are feasible through household surveys and facility audit, and improvements in vital registration, including specific perinatal certificates and revised International Classification of Disease codes, are needed. A simple, programme-relevant stillbirth classification that can be used with verbal autopsy would provide a basis for comparable national estimates. A new focus on all deaths around the time of birth is crucial to inform programmatic investment.

Suboptimal care and perinatal mortality in ten European regions: methodology and evaluation of an international audit

BACKGROUND

A European concerted action (the EuroNatal study) investigated differences in perinatal mortality between countries of Europe. This report describes the methods used in the EuroNatal international audit and discusses the validity of the results.

METHODS

Perinatal deaths between 1993 and 1998 in regions of ten European countries were identified. The categories of death chosen for the study were singleton fetal deaths at 28 or more weeks of gestational age, all intrapartum deaths at 28 or more weeks of gestational age and neonatal deaths at 34 or more weeks of gestational age. Deaths with major congenital anomalies were excluded. An international audit panel used explicit criteria to review all cases, which were blinded for region. Subjective interpretation was used in cases of events or interventions where explicit criteria did not exist. Suboptimal factors were identified in the antenatal, intrapartum and neonatal periods, and classified as 'maternal/social', due to 'infrastructure/service organization', or due to 'professional care delivery'. The contribution of each suboptimal factor to the fatal outcome was listed and consensus was reached on a final grade using a procedure that included correspondence and plenary meetings.

RESULTS

In all regions combined, 90% of all known or estimated cases in the selected categories were included in the audit. In total, 1619 cases of perinatal death were audited. Consensus was reached in 1543 (95%) cases. In 75% of all cases, the grade was based on explicit criteria. In the remaining cases, consensus was reached within subpanels without reference to predefined criteria. There was reasonable to good agreement between and within subpanels, and within panel members.

CONCLUSIONS

The international audit procedure proved feasible and led to consistent results. The results that relate to suboptimal care will need to be studied in depth in order to reach conclusions about their implications for assessing the quality of perinatal care in the individual regions.

An evaluation of classification systems for stillbirth

Background

Audit and classification of stillbirths is an essential part of clinical practice and a crucial step towards stillbirth prevention. Due to the limitations of the ICD system and lack of an international approach to an acceptable solution, numerous disparate classification systems have emerged. We assessed the performance of six contemporary systems to inform the development of an internationally accepted approach.

Methods

We evaluated the following systems: Amended Aberdeen, Extended Wigglesworth; PSANZ-PDC, ReCoDe, Tulip and CODAC. Nine teams from 7 countries applied the classification systems to cohorts of stillbirths from their regions using 857 stillbirth cases. The main outcome measures were: the ability to retain the important information about the death using the InfoKeep rating; the ease of use according to the Ease rating (both measures used a five-point scale with a score <2 considered unsatisfactory); inter-observer agreement and the proportion of unexplained stillbirths. A randomly selected subset of 100 stillbirths was used to assess inter-observer agreement.

Results

InfoKeep scores were significantly different across the classifications (p ≤ 0.01) due to low scores for Wigglesworth and Aberdeen. CODAC received the highest mean (SD) score of 3.40 (0.73) followed by PSANZ-PDC, ReCoDe and Tulip [2.77 (1.00), 2.36 (1.21), 1.92 (1.24) respectively]. Wigglesworth and Aberdeen resulted in a high proportion of unexplained stillbirths and CODAC and Tulip the lowest. While Ease scores were different (p ≤ 0.01), all systems received satisfactory scores; CODAC received the highest score. Aberdeen and Wigglesworth showed poor agreement with kappas of 0.35 and 0.25 respectively. Tulip performed best with a kappa of 0.74. The remainder had good to fair agreement.

Conclusion

The Extended Wigglesworth and Amended Aberdeen systems cannot be recommended for classification of stillbirths. Overall, CODAC performed best with PSANZ-PDC and ReCoDe performing well. Tulip was shown to have the best agreement and a low proportion of unexplained stillbirths. The virtues of these systems need to be considered in the development of an international solution to classification of stillbirths. Further studies are required on the performance of classification systems in the context of developing countries. Suboptimal agreement highlights the importance of instituting measures to ensure consistency for any classification system.

Audit of perinatal deaths in a tertiary level hospital in Latvia (1995-1999) using the Nordic-Baltic perinatal death classification: evidence of suboptimal care

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to explore applicability of the Nordic-Baltic perinatal death (PND) classification in a single hospital via evaluation of changes of the preventability of PND over the time period in a tertiary level perinatal care center in Latvia.

METHOD

All PND cases during the period 1995-1999 at a tertiary referral perinatal care center, the Riga Maternity Hospital (RMH), were analyzed using the common Nordic-Baltic PND classification.

RESULTS

The total perinatal mortality rate (PNMR) did not decline at the RMH over the study period. The rate of antenatal and intrapartum deaths at <28 weeks of gestation increased (p < 0.01). Early neonatal deaths at 28-33 weeks of gestation with a low 5-minute Apgar score became less frequent (p < 0.05). There was a trend towards more cases of probably suboptimal care (p < 0.005) and the proportion of preventable PND cases increased from 14.7% in 1995 to 36.4% in 1999 (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The perinatal audit performed at the RMH using the Nordic-Baltic PND classification disclosed a requirement for further improvement of perinatal care in the hospital. The classification can be used to evaluate the preventability of perinatal death cases in a single hospital, and its application in other hospitals in Latvia could provide information necessary for the improvement of perinatal care in the country.

The Tulip classification of perinatal mortality: introduction and multidisciplinary inter-rater agreement

OBJECTIVE

To introduce the pathophysiological Tulip classification system for underlying cause and mechanism of perinatal mortality based on clinical and pathological findings for the purpose of counselling and prevention.

DESIGN

Descriptive.

SETTING

Tertiary referral teaching hospital.

POPULATION

Perinatally related deaths.

METHODS

A classification consisting of groups of cause and mechanism of death was drawn up by a panel through the causal analysis of the events related to death. Individual classification of cause and mechanism was performed by assessors. Panel discussions were held for cases without consensus.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Inter-rater agreement for cause and mechanism of death.

RESULTS

The classification consists of six main causes with subclassifications: (1) congenital anomaly (chromosomal, syndrome and single- or multiple-organ system), (2) placenta (placental bed, placental pathology, umbilical cord complication and not otherwise specified [NOS]), (3) prematurity (preterm prelabour rupture of membranes, preterm labour, cervical dysfunction, iatrogenous and NOS), (4) infection (transplacental, ascending, neonatal and NOS), (5) other (fetal hydrops of unknown origin, maternal disease, trauma and out of the ordinary) and (6) unknown. Overall kappa coefficient for agreement for cause was 0.81 (95% CI 0.80-0.83). Six mechanisms were drawn up: cardio/circulatory insufficiency, multi-organ failure, respiratory insufficiency, cerebral insufficiency, placental insufficiency and unknown. Overall kappa for mechanism was 0.72 (95% CI 0.70-0.74).

CONCLUSIONS

Classifying perinatal mortality to compare performance over time and between centres is useful and necessary. Interpretation of classifications demands consistency. The Tulip classification allows unambiguous classification of underlying cause and mechanism of perinatal mortality, gives a good inter-rater agreement, with a low percentage of unknown causes, and is easily applicable in a team of clinicians when guidelines are followed.

The prevalence of stillbirths: a systematic review

Background

Stillbirth rate is an important indicator of access to and quality of antenatal and delivery care. Obtaining overall estimates across various regions of the world is not straightforward due to variation in definitions, data collection methods and reporting.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of a range of pregnancy-related conditions including stillbirths and performed meta-analysis of the subset of studies reporting stillbirth rates. We examined variation across rates and used meta-regression techniques to explain observed variation.

Results

We identified 389 articles on stillbirth prevalence among the 2580 included in the systematic review. We included 70 providing 80 data sets from 50 countries in the meta-analysis. Pooled prevalence rates show variation across various subgroup categories. Rates per 100 births are higher in studies conducted in less developed country settings as compared to more developed (1.17 versus 0.50), of inadequate quality as compared to adequate (1.12 versus 0.66), using sub-national sample as compared to national (1.38 versus 0.68), reporting all stillbirths as compared to late stillbirths (0.95 versus 0.63), published in non-English as compared to English (0.91 versus 0.59) and as journal articles as compared to non-journal (1.37 versus 0.67). The results of the meta-regression show the significance of two predictor variables – development status of the setting and study quality – on stillbirth prevalence.

Conclusion

Stillbirth prevalence at the community level is typically less than 1% in more developed parts of the world and could exceed 3% in less developed regions. Regular reviews of stillbirth rates in appropriately designed and reported studies are useful in monitoring the adequacy of care. Systematic reviews of prevalence studies are helpful in explaining sources of variation across rates. Exploring these methodological issues will lead to improved standards for assessing the burden of reproductive ill-health.

La mortalité néonatale en France :

A neonatal death certificate was introduced in France in 1997. It provides detailed data on the causes of death and the characteristics of newborn, birth and parents. Our aim was to describe the new results of this certificate.

METHOD

All deaths in 1999 in the first 27 days of life were included (N=2036). Certificates were analysed using the usual process, especially following the International Classification of Diseases.

RESULTS

The neonatal death certificate was used for 87% of deaths. The proportion of documented items was 96% for gestational age and birthweight, 87% for maternal age and parity and 70% for maternal occupation. Almost three quarters of the deaths occurred in the first 6 days (36.9% in the first 24 hours and 35.1% between one and six days). 30.5% of the died infants were born before 27 weeks of gestation and 36.5% between 27 and 36 weeks. A shift in medical care was observed at 26 weeks, with an increase in caesarean sections before labour and newborn referrals. In all, 63.3% of neonatal deaths were due to perinatal conditions, and 27.9% to congenital anomalies. The proportion of deaths explained by congenital anomalies was higher for longer gestational age: 14% of deaths between 25 and 28 weeks of gestation vs 38 to 43% between 33 and 42 weeks.

CONCLUSION

The neonatal death certificate was well accepted; however the data on detailed causes of death and parent's characteristics were insufficient. Analysis of the circumstances and the causes of death is facilitated with the neonatal death certificate and it will be developped in the future.

Classification of perinatal deaths: development of the Australian and New Zealand classifications

Classifications of perinatal deaths have been undertaken for surveillance of causes of death, but also for auditing individual deaths to identify suboptimal care at any level, so that preventive strategies may be implemented. This paper describes the history and development of the paired obstetric and neonatal Perinatal Society of Australia and New Zealand (PSANZ) classifications in the context of other classifications. The PSANZ Perinatal Death Classification is based on obstetric antecedent factors that initiated the sequence of events leading to the death, and was developed largely from the Aberdeen and Whitfield classifications. The PSANZ Neonatal Death Classification is based on fetal and neonatal factors associated with the death. The classifications, accessible on the PSANZ website (http://www.psanz.org), have definitions and guidelines for use, a high level of agreement between classifiers, and are now being used in nearly all Australian states and New Zealand.

Regional quality assessment in perinatal care

Quality assessment is essential in every sector of health care and, in modern regionalized perinatal care, continuous data should be collected at all levels to give a stable basis for this activity. The discussion of definitions and choice of indicators is in itself an activity that will increase awareness of quality. Modern computer facilities will simplify data storage and analysis, but do not change the need to use a limited number of well-validated and appropriate variables.

Perinatal Mortality Study Group. Perinatal mortality rate--hospital based study during 1998-2001 at Hacettepe University

AIMS

To determine the causes of perinatal mortality and to calculate perinatal mortality rates at Hacettepe University Hospital.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In 1998 the Perinatal Mortality Study Group was established at Hacettepe University. The study group was constituted by the Department of Pediatrics, Units of Pediatric Pathology, Pediatric Cardiology, Pediatric Surgery, Genetics and Neonatology and the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Perinatology Unit. At the end of every month, each case (including autopsy results if available) was discussed among the group, and the cause of mortality was determined according to the Modified Wigglesworth Classification, by the consensus of the group members. Perinatal mortality rates at Hacettepe University were prospectively calculated. Perinatal mortality figures of two periods were compared (1998-1999: Group A and 2000-2001: Group B).

RESULTS

Total number of births over 500 grams was 3173 in Group A and 3013 in Group B. Perinatal mortality rate was 33.72/1000 in Group A and 16.92/1000 in Group B. Of the perinatal deaths, 61.46% were intrauterine deaths and 38.54% were early neonatal deaths in Group A. In Group B, 58.83% were intrauterine deaths and 40% were early neonatal deaths. In Group A, 72% of the deaths were < 1500 grams, and 53.3% were 500-1000 grams. The most common cause of death during this period was prematurity (Modified Wigglesworth Group III) (29.3%), followed by lethal congenital malformations (Group II) (26.6%) and macerated intrauterine deaths (Group I) (22.9%). Autopsy was available in 70.7% of the cases and micronecropsy was available in 12%. Genetic studies were performed in 24% of the cases and termination of pregnancy was carried out for fetal anomalies in 10.7% of the cases. In Group B, 72.6% of the cases were < 1500 grams and 47.1% of the cases were 500-1000 grams. The most common cause of death during this period was lethal congenital malformations (Group II) (31.4%), followed by macerated intrauterine deaths (Group I) (21.5%) and specific causes (Group V) (21.5%). Autopsy was available in 70.17% of the cases and micronecropsy was obtained in 10.52% of the cases. 20% of the cases underwent genetic studies during pregnancy and termination of pregnancy was carried out in 19.29% of the cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Perinatal mortality rate has decreased at Hacettepe University over the last two years. The authors believe that this is a result of the multidisciplinary work which has had an impact on perinatal and neonatal care. The most common cause of mortality has changed from prematurity to lethal congenital malformations in this period. Since our institution is a referral center, around 60% of mortality is due to intrauterine deaths and around 30% of the deaths are due to lethal congenital malformations. Unfortunately lethal congenital malformations are referred to our center at an advanced stage of pregnancy.

Classification of perinatal death in a developing country

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate and compare the three most commonly used perinatal death classification systems: (1) the Nordic-Baltic; (2) the Aberdeen; and (3) the Wigglesworth, and assess their applicability in a developing country (Sudan) with a high perinatal mortality rate, and their justification for practical use in quality assurance and audit activities.

METHODS

At Omdurman Maternity Hospital (OMH), Khartoum, Sudan, 166 perinatal deaths were prospectively assessed during a 3-month period (May-August 2000) with a total of 2260 births. Narratives of 166 perinatal deaths were prepared for the purpose of audit. A panel of two Danish and one Sudanese obstetrician categorized the cases according to: (1) the Nordic-Baltic; (2) the Aberdeen; and (3) the Wigglesworth classification.

RESULTS

By all three classifications a similar fraction of cases (approx. 85%) were allocated to one category only, and in 15% of cases the assessors were in doubt into which of two categories the cases should be allocated. The necessary information is often not available, giving at least 40% classified as 'unknown' in the Aberdeen classification, whereas the Wigglesworth classification results in an even larger group of unspecified asphyxia.

CONCLUSION

Classification of perinatal deaths in developing countries is associated with problems regarding application, validity and usefulness. The Nordic-Baltic classification seems to be most suitable for appropriate stratification using routinely recorded variables and providing categories associated with specific levels of care.

Perinatal mortality in Turkey

A prospective study was conducted to investigate perinatal mortality rate, stillbirth rate and early neonatal mortality rate in 29 centres throughout Turkey between 1 January 1999 and 31 December 1999. The most frequent causes of mortality were determined according to the modified Wigglesworth classification, and the results were evaluated with respect to the differences between the centres and the regions. The total number of births from all centres was 92 587. Perinatal mortality rate was 34.9 per 1000, stillbirth rate 18 and early neonatal death rate 17.2 per 1000. Perinatal mortality rates were highest with 71.9 and 62.9 per 1000 in the regions that have low socio-economic status and are predominantly rural and semi-urban. The rate was lowest (27.3 per 1000) in the region that is economically more developed. In 23 out of 29 centres, the causes of death were clearly determined. The most important causes of death according to the modified Wigglesworth classification were antepartum stillbirths (42.7%), prematurity (26.0%) and lethal congenital malformations (13.2%). In conclusion, reduction in the perinatal mortality rate in Turkey is likely to be possible only with the co-ordination of the government, universities, obstetricians and neonatologists and improvement of prenatal, delivery and postnatal care and prevention of prematurity. Perinatal mortality studies should be extended and better organised regionally in Turkey.

Fundamental classification of perinatal death. Validation of a new classification system of perinatal death

OBJECTIVE

To validate a newly introduced classification system for the registration of perinatal mortality.

DESIGN

Descriptive.

SETTING

Dutch Healthcare region Delft-Westland-Oostland (DWO).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In a 10-years period (1983-1992), all cases of perinatal death with a birthweight above 500 g (n=239) were included into the study. Six assessors: four gynaecologists and two paediatricians were asked to classify all cases using a classification model proposed by the authors. This model is based on the underlying cause of death using simple principles of obstetrical and neonatal pathology: birth trauma, infection, placenta or cord pathology, pathology of immune tolerance of mother and fetus, congenital malformation of the fetus and complications of a pre-viable delivery. Therefore, we used the term fundamental classification. The six assessors worked independently of each other in classifying all cases of perinatal death, were not involved in the original development of the system and were unaware of the results of the classification of their colleagues. Agreement beyond chance between assessors was calculated using kappa's coefficient for multiple observers and multiple test results.

RESULTS

Overall kappa was 0.70 (95% confidence interval (C.I.) 0.68-0.72). Reproducibility was poor for the categories trauma and unclassifiable, fair for the categories infections and placental/cord pathology, and very good to excellent for the categories maternal immune system pathology, congenital malformations and complications of prematurity.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed system showed a good level of agreement and appeared to be simply applicable. It offers a good insight in the underlying cause of death with the possibility for recognising preventive factors in future pregnancies and will enable (inter)national comparisons in causes of perinatal death. A reliable uniform registration of perinatal death based on the underlying causes should be the basis for improvement of the quality of perinatal care.

Using the Nordic-Baltic perinatal death classification to assess perinatal care in Ukraine

OBJECTIVE

To identify health care issues important to reduce the perinatal mortality rate (PMR) in Ukraine.

STUDY DESIGN

Perinatal deaths in the Donetsk region (Ukraine) in 1997-1998 were compared with those in Denmark in 1996 by using the Nordic-Baltic classification for perinatal deaths. Clinical guidelines, use of technology and rates of interventions in the two regions were described.

RESULTS

A two-fold increase in PMR was found in Ukraine compared to Denmark, mainly explained by higher rates of antenatal deaths of growth restricted fetuses, intrapartum deaths, and neonatal deaths due to asphyxia. Vacuum extraction is rarely used in Ukraine. The clinical guidelines for care differ significantly between the two regions.

CONCLUSION

Appropriate use of technology and implementation of evidence-based guidelines should be a matter of high priority in the Donetsk region, Ukraine.

Substandard factors in perinatal care in The Netherlands: a regional audit of perinatal deaths

BACKGROUND

To determine: 1) whether substandard factors were present in cases of perinatal death, and to what extent another course of action might have resulted in a better outcome, and 2) whether there were differences in the frequency of substandard factors by level of care, particularly between midwives and gynecologists/obstetricians and between home and hospital births.

METHODS

Population-based perinatal audit, with explicit evidence-based audit criteria.

SETTING

The northern part of the province of South-Holland in The Netherlands. All levels of perinatal care (primary, secondary and tertiary care, and home and hospital births) were included.

CASES

Three hundred and forty-two cases of perinatal mortality (24 weeks of pregnancy--28 days after birth).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Scores by a Dutch and a European audit panel. Score 0: no substandard factors identified; score 1, 2 or 3: one or more substandard factors identified, which were unlikely (1), possibly (2) or probably (3) related to the perinatal death.

RESULTS

In 25% of the perinatal deaths (95% Confidence Interval: 20-30%) a substandard factor was identified that according to the Dutch panel was possibly or probably related to the perinatal death. These were mainly maternal/social factors (10% of all perinatal deaths; most frequent substandard factor: smoking during pregnancy), and antenatal care factors (10% of all perinatal deaths; most frequent substandard factor: detection of intra-uterine growth retardation). We did not find statistically significant differences in scores between midwives and gynecologists/obstetricians or between home and hospital births. The European panel identified more substandard factors, but these were again equally distributed by level of care.

CONCLUSIONS

Perinatal deaths might be partly preventable in The Netherlands. There is no evidence that the frequency of substandard factors is related to specific aspects of the perinatal care system in The Netherlands.

Perinatal deaths and insufficient antenatal care in Latvia

OBJECTIVE

A national audit on perinatal deaths was performed to assess the quality of antenatal care, and to suggest measures for improved antenatal care.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Medical records of all the perinatal deaths in Latvia in the years 1995-1996 have been studied. Non-attenders and attenders of antenatal care were characterized by socio-economic and medical variables: maternal age, parity, history of perinatal outcome, health status and behavioral hazards during the index pregnancy, length of gestation and birth weight. The Nordic-Baltic perinatal death classification was used.

RESULTS

In 85 of 442 cases (19%) of perinatal deaths women had not taken advantage of antenatal care provided for them. Non-attenders were more likely to be smokers (p<0.001) and alcohol abusers (p<0.005), above 35 years of age (p<0.005), and had higher parity (p<0.001). Non-attenders more often had systemic diseases and pregnancy complications. Neonatal complications, such as congenital syphilis (p<0.05) and other infections (p<0.05), were more common among non-attenders. There was no difference in rates of preterm birth and low birth weight between attenders and non-attenders.

CONCLUSIONS

One fifth of mothers with perinatal death did not attend ANC, and in some women who attended ANC, lack of intervention was related to the perinatal death.

Potentially avoidable perinatal deaths in Denmark, Sweden and Lithuania as classified by the Nordic-Baltic classification

OBJECTIVES

To analyse which subgroups of perinatal deaths contribute most to the perinatal mortality rate in Lithuania compared with Denmark/Sweden.

DESIGN

Comparison of all perinatal deaths in Denmark/Sweden 1991 and Lithuania 1993-1994 by the common Nordic-Baltic perinatal death classification, based on information from the medical records.

RESULTS

The doubled perinatal mortality in Lithuania compared with Denmark/Sweden is mainly explained by a threefold increase of intrapartum and two- to fivefold increase in neonatal deaths of nonmalformed infants. The higher rate of malformed infants is partly explained by a four times higher mortality from neural tube defects.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a common perinatal death classification has identified categories mainly responsible for the higher rate of perinatal mortality, but further investigation of potentially avoidable factors requires further study.

The perinatal mortality rate as an indicator of quality of care in international comparisons

The perinatal mortality rate is used as an indicator of the quality of antenatal and perinatal care, yet uncritical application of this indicator in international comparisons can be misleading. The perinatal mortality rate depends on a number of factors and important determinants that need to be assessed separately before reaching conclusions about quality-of-care issues. This article provides a conceptual model of the construction of the perinatal mortality rate. It illustrates the relationship between quality of antenatal and perinatal care and risk factors for perinatal mortality and how these lead to the perinatal mortality rate. It also indicates how differences in registration procedures and practices influence the final mortality figures published by individual countries. For international comparison, the first step is to apply common definitions. The rate can vary by 50% depending on the definition used. Also, sources of registration bias need to be examined, because they differ considerably by country. Underregistration is known to be as high as 20% of perinatal deaths. The next step is to correct perinatal mortality figures according to differences in known risk factors. The perinatal mortality rate then can serve as a reasonable indicator for the quality of antenatal and perinatal care. In western countries, perinatal mortality could be reduced by as much as 25% with improved standards of care. Policies and practices in individual countries concerning ethical issues related to termination of pregnancy and care of newborn infants with (very) poor prognosis need to be taken into account as well. They are not related to quality of care, but do have a relatively large impact on the perinatal mortality rate.

Infant mortality in Denmark and Sweden. A comparison based on data in two national registries

OBJECTIVES

To study in detail the differences in infant mortality between Denmark and Sweden.

STUDY DESIGN

Data retrieved from national health registers on infant death rates were compared for 1980-1988, supplemented with a study on the impact of socio-economic conditions in 1985-86 (Denmark) or 1986 (Sweden).

RESULTS

Even after stratification for maternal age, parity, and socio-economic group, the Danish mortality rate was higher in all age-at-death intervals except for stillbirths. Maternal age-parity distribution was more favourable in Denmark, the socio-economic distribution in Sweden. The most marked country differences was seen in young women. The difference in the rate of perinatal deaths but not of later deaths is explainable by a more favourable birth weight distribution in Sweden than in Denmark.

CONCLUSIONS

The studied variables do not explain the difference in mortality risk but it may be due to life style factors so far not identified.

An European concerted action investigating the validity of perinatal mortality as an outcome indicator for the quality of antenatal and perinatal care

In this paper the concepts, objectives, design, and data analysis procedures of the EuroNatal study are described. This study started in 1996 and is a concerted action including 14 countries in Europe. The EuroNatal study aims at determining the validity of national perinatal mortality rates as an outcome indicator for the quality of antenatal and perinatal care. It is based on a conceptual model describing the relationships between differences in quality of antenatal and perinatal care, maternal and infant risk factors, variation in applied definitions, reliability of registration procedures and practices, and the outcome in terms of "true" and "observed" differences in perinatal mortality. In the first part of the study data is collected at national and aggregate level; in the second part data is collected retrospectively on individual cases of perinatal mortality in a regional sample area. Analysis of the individual cases of perinatal mortality will be by means of a perinatal audit conducted by an international expert panel. The project builds upon the work done by the participants in their respective countries. By applying common research protocols, international comparability of data collection will be enhanced and will help to create a common body of knowledge in the area of perinatal epidemiology and perinatal care. Comparison between countries is likely to lead to new insights into the strengths and weaknesses of antenatal and perinatal care systems of individual countries.