Stillbirths including intrapartum timing: EN-BIRTH multi-country validation study.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
; 21(Suppl 1): 226, 2021 Mar 26.
Article
em En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-33765942
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND:
An estimated >2 million babies stillborn around the world each year lack visibility. Low- and middle-income countries carry 84% of the burden yet have the least data. Most births are now in facilities, hence routine register-recording presents an opportunity to improve counting of stillbirths, but research is limited, particularly regarding accuracy. This paper evaluates register-recorded measurement of hospital stillbirths, classification accuracy, and barriers and enablers to routine recording.METHODS:
The EN-BIRTH mixed-methods, observational study took place in five hospitals in Bangladesh, Nepal and Tanzania (2017-2018). Clinical observers collected time-stamped data on perinatal care and birth outcomes as gold standard. To assess accuracy of routine register-recorded stillbirth rates, we compared birth outcomes recorded in labour ward registers to observation data. We calculated absolute rate differences and individual-level validation metrics (sensitivity, specificity, percent agreement). We assessed misclassification of stillbirths with neonatal deaths. To examine stillbirth appearance (fresh/macerated) as a proxy for timing of death, we compared appearance to observed timing of intrauterine death based on heart rate at admission.RESULTS:
23,072 births were observed including 550 stillbirths. Register-recorded completeness of birth outcomes was > 90%. The observed study stillbirth rate ranged from 3.8 (95%CI = 2.0,7.0) to 50.3 (95%CI = 43.6,58.0)/1000 total births and was under-estimated in routine registers by 1.1 to 7.3 /1000 total births (register observed ratio 0.9-0.7). Specificity of register-recorded birth outcomes was > 99% and sensitivity varied between hospitals, ranging from 77.7-86.1%. Percent agreement between observer-assessed birth outcome and register-recorded birth outcome was very high across all hospitals and all modes of birth (> 98%). Fresh or macerated stillbirth appearance was a poor proxy for timing of stillbirth. While there were similar numbers of stillbirths misclassified as neonatal deaths (17/430) and neonatal deaths misclassified as stillbirths (21/36), neonatal deaths were proportionately more likely to be misclassified as stillbirths (58.3% vs 4.0%). Enablers to more accurate register-recording of birth outcome included supervision and data use.CONCLUSIONS:
Our results show these routine registers accurately recorded stillbirths. Fresh/macerated appearance was a poor proxy for intrapartum stillbirths, hence more focus on measuring fetal heart rate is crucial to classification and importantly reduction in these preventable deaths.Palavras-chave
Texto completo:
1
Base de dados:
MEDLINE
Assunto principal:
Sistema de Registros
/
Natimorto
/
Confiabilidade dos Dados
/
Hospitais
Tipo de estudo:
Clinical_trials
/
Diagnostic_studies
/
Observational_studies
Limite:
Adolescent
/
Adult
/
Female
/
Humans
/
Newborn
/
Pregnancy
País/Região como assunto:
Africa
/
Asia
Idioma:
En
Revista:
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
Assunto da revista:
OBSTETRICIA
Ano de publicação:
2021
Tipo de documento:
Article
País de afiliação:
Reino Unido