Risk factors for postpartum maternal mortality and hospital readmission in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: In low- and middle-income countries, approximately two thirds of maternal deaths occur in the postpartum period. Yet, care for women beyond 24 h after discharge is limited. The objective of this systematic review is to summarize current evidence on socio-demographic and clinical risk factors for (1) postpartum mortality and (2) postpartum hospital readmission. METHODS: A combination of keywords and subject headings (i.e. MeSH terms) for postpartum maternal mortality or readmission were searched. Articles published up to January 9, 2021 were identified in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases, without language restrictions. Studies reporting socio-demographic or clinical risk factors for postpartum mortality or readmission within six weeks of delivery among women who delivered a livebirth in a low- or middle-income country were included. Data were extracted independently by two reviewers based on study characteristics, population, and outcomes. Included studies were assessed for quality and risk of bias using the Downs and Black checklist for ratings of randomized and non-randomized studies. RESULTS: Of 8783 abstracts screened, seven studies were included (total N = 387,786). Risk factors for postpartum mortality included Caesarean mode of delivery, nulliparity, low or very low birthweight, and shock upon admission. Risk factors for postpartum readmission included Caesarean mode of delivery, HIV positive serostatus, and abnormal body temperature. CONCLUSIONS: Few studies reported individual socio-demographic or clinical risk factors for mortality or readmission after delivery in low- and middle-income countries; only Caesarean delivery was consistently reported. Further research is needed to identify factors that put women at greatest risk of post-discharge complications and mortality. Understanding post-discharge risk would facilitate targeted postpartum care and reduce adverse outcomes in women after delivery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018103955.

Ceragenin-coated endotracheal tubes for the reduction of ventilator-associated pneumonia: a prospective, longitudinal, cross-over, interrupted time, implementation study protocol (CEASE VAP study).

BACKGROUND: Critically ill patients are at high risk of acquiring ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), which occurs in approximately 20% of mechanically ventilated patients. VAP results either from aspiration of pathogen-contaminated oropharyngeal secretions or contaminated biofilms that form on endotracheal tubes (ETTs) after intubation. VAP results in increased duration of mechanical ventilation, increased intensive care unit and hospital length of stay, increased risk of death and increased healthcare costs. Because of its impact on patient outcomes and the healthcare system, VAP is regarded as an important patient safety issue and there is an urgent need for better evidence on the efficacy of prevention strategies. Modified ETTs that reduce aspiration of oropharyngeal secretions with subglottic secretion drainage or reduce the occurrence of biofilm with a coating of ceragenins (CSAs) are available for clinical use in Canada. In this implementation study, we will evaluate the efficacy of these two types of Health Canada-licensed ETTs on the occurrence of VAP, and impact on patient-centred outcomes. METHODS: In this ongoing, pragmatic, prospective, longitudinal, interrupted time, cross-over implementation study, we will compare the efficacy of a CSA-coated ETT (CeraShield N8 Pharma) with an ETT with subglottic secretion drainage (Taper Guard, Covidien). The study periods consist of four alternating time periods of 11 or 12 weeks or a total of 23 weeks for each ETT. All patients intubated with the study ETT in each time period will be included in an intention-to-treat analysis. Outcomes will include VAP incidence, mortality and health services utilisation including antibiotic use and length of stay. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the Health Sciences Research Ethics Board at Queen's University. The results of this study will be actively disseminated through manuscript publication and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05761613.

Identification of validated case definitions for medical conditions used in primary care electronic medical record databases: a systematic review.

Objectives: Data derived from primary care electronic medical records (EMRs) are being used for research and surveillance. Case definitions are required to identify patients with specific conditions in EMR data with a degree of accuracy. The purpose of this study is to identify and provide a summary of case definitions that have been validated in primary care EMR data. Materials and Methods: We searched MEDLINE and Embase (from inception to June 2016) to identify studies that describe case definitions for clinical conditions in EMR data and report on the performance metrics of these definitions. Results: We identified 40 studies reporting on case definitions for 47 unique clinical conditions. The studies used combinations of International Classification of Disease version 9 (ICD-9) codes, Read codes, laboratory values, and medications in their algorithms. The most common validation metric reported was positive predictive value, with inconsistent reporting of sensitivity and specificity. Discussion: This review describes validated case definitions derived in primary care EMR data, which can be used to understand disease patterns and prevalence among primary care populations. Limitations include incomplete reporting of performance metrics and uncertainty regarding performance of case definitions across different EMR databases and countries. Conclusion: Our review found a significant number of validated case definitions with good performance for use in primary care EMR data. These could be applied to other EMR databases in similar contexts and may enable better disease surveillance when using clinical EMR data. Consistent reporting across validation studies using EMR data would facilitate comparison across studies. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42016040020 (submitted June 8, 2016, and last revised June 14, 2016).

Identification of validated case definitions for chronic disease using electronic medical records: a systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Primary care electronic medical record (EMR) data are being used for research, surveillance, and clinical monitoring. To broaden the reach and usability of EMR data, case definitions must be specified to identify and characterize important chronic conditions. The purpose of this study is to identify all case definitions for a set of chronic conditions that have been tested and validated in primary care EMR and EMR-linked data. This work will provide a reference list of case definitions, together with their performance metrics, and will identify gaps where new case definitions are needed. METHODS: We will consider a set of 40 chronic conditions, previously identified as potentially important for surveillance in a review of multimorbidity measures. We will perform a systematic search of the published literature to identify studies that describe case definitions for clinical conditions in EMR data and report the performance of these definitions. We will stratify our search by studies that use EMR data alone and those that use EMR-linked data. We will compare the performance of different definitions for the same conditions and explore the influence of data source, jurisdiction, and patient population. DISCUSSION: EMR data from primary care providers can be compiled and used for benefit by the healthcare system. Not only does this work have the potential to further develop disease surveillance and health knowledge, EMR surveillance systems can provide rapid feedback to participating physicians regarding their patients. Existing case definitions will serve as a starting point for the development and validation of new case definitions and will enable better surveillance, research, and practice feedback based on detailed clinical EMR data. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42016040020.