Prevalence and management of ectopic and molar pregnancies in 17 countries in Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean: a secondary analysis of the WHO multi-country cross-sectional survey on abortion.

INTRODUCTION: There are limited global data on ectopic pregnancy (EP) and molar pregnancy (MP), making it important to understand their epidemiology and management across different regions. Our study aimed to describe their prevalence for both conditions, severity of their complications and management among women in selected health facilities across 17 countries in Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of the WHO multi-country survey on abortion. Data were collected from 280 healthcare facilities across 11 countries in Africa and 6 in LAC. Sociodemographic information, signs and symptoms, management and clinical outcomes were extracted from medical records. Facility-level data on post-abortion care (PAC) capabilities were also collected, and facilities were classified accordingly. χ2 or Fisher's exact tests were used to compare categorical data. RESULTS: The total number of women with EP and MP across both regions was 9.9% (2 415/24 424) where EP accounted for 7.8% (1 904/24 424) and MP for 2.1% (511/24 424). EP presented a higher severity of complications than MP. At admission, 49.8% of EP had signs of peritoneal irritation. The most common surgical management for EP was laparotomy (87.2%) and for MP, uterine evacuation (89.8%). Facilities with higher scores in infrastructure and capability to provide PAC more frequently provided minimal invasive management using methotrexate/other medical treatment (34.9%) and laparoscopy (5.1%). CONCLUSION: In Africa and LAC, EP and MP cause significant maternal morbidity and mortality. The disparity in the provision of good quality care highlights the need to strengthen the implementation of evidence-based recommendations in the clinical and surgical management of EP and MP.

Women's well-being and functioning after evidence-based antenatal care: a protocol for a systematic review of intervention studies.

INTRODUCTION: The 2016 WHO antenatal guidelines propose evidence-based recommendations to improve maternal outcomes. We aim to complement these recommendations by describing and estimating the effects of the interventions recommended by WHO on maternal well-being or functioning. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a systematic review of experimental and quasi-experimental studies evaluating women's well-being or functioning following the implementation of evidence-based antenatal interventions, published in peer-reviewed journals through a 15-year interval (2005-2020). The lead reviewer will screen all records identified at MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, LILACS and SciELO. Two other reviewers will control screening strategy quality. Quality and risk of bias will be assessed using a specially designed instrument. Data synthesis will consider the instruments applied, how often they were used, conditions/interventions for positive or negative effects documented, statistical measures used to document effectiveness and how results were presented. A random-effects meta-analysis comparing frequently used instruments may be conducted. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study will be a systematic review with no human beings' involvement, therefore not requiring ethical approval. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and scientific events. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019143436.

Measurement of maternal functioning during pregnancy and postpartum: findings from the cross-sectional WHO pilot study in Jamaica, Kenya, and Malawi.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization's definition of maternal morbidity refers to "a negative impact on the woman's wellbeing and/or functioning". Many studies have documented the, mostly negative, effects of maternal ill-health on functioning. Although conceptually important, measurement of functioning remains underdeveloped, and the best way to measure functioning in pregnant and postpartum populations is unknown. METHODS: A cross-sectional study among women presenting for antenatal (N = 750) and postpartum (N = 740) care in Jamaica, Kenya and Malawi took place in 2015-2016. Functioning was measured through the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS-12). Data on health conditions and socio-demographic characteristics were collected through structured interview, medical record review, and clinical examination. This paper presents descriptive data on the distribution of functioning status among pregnant and postpartum women and examines the relationship between functioning and health conditions. RESULTS: Women attending antenatal care had a lower level of functioning than those attending postpartum care. Women with a health condition or associated demographic risk factor were more likely to have a lower level of functioning than those with no health condition. However, the absolute difference in functioning scores typically remained modest. CONCLUSIONS: Functioning is an important concept which integrates a woman-centered approach to examining how a health condition affects her life, and ultimately her return to functioning after delivery. However, the WHODAS-12 may not be the optimal tool for use in this population and additional components to capture pregnancy-specific issues may be needed. Challenges remain in how to integrate functioning outcomes into routine maternal healthcare at-scale and across diverse settings.

Reference ranges of the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) score and diagnostic validity of its 12-item version in identifying altered functioning in healthy postpartum women.

OBJECTIVES: To compare scores on the 36-item WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 tool (WHODAS-36) for postpartum women across a continuum of morbidity and to validate the 12-item version (WHODAS-12). METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of the Brazilian retrospective cohort study on long-term repercussions of severe maternal morbidity. We determined mean, median, and percentile values for WHODAS-36 total score and for each domain, and percentile values for WHODAS-12 total score in postpartum women divided into three groups: "no," "nonsevere," and "severe" morbidities. RESULTS: The WHODAS-36 mean total scores were 11.58, 18.31, and 19.19, respectively for no, nonsevere, and severe morbidity. There was a dose-dependent effect on scores for each domain of WHODAS-36 according to the presence and severity of morbidity. The diagnostic validity of WHODAS-12 was determined by comparing it with WHODAS-36 as a "gold standard." The best cut-off point for diagnosing dysfunctionality was the 95th percentile. CONCLUSION: The upward trend of WHODAS-36 total mean value scores of women with no morbidity compared with those with morbidity along a severity continuum may reflect the impact of morbidity on postpartum functioning.

Validation of the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) 12-item tool against the 36-item version for measuring functioning and disability associated with pregnancy and history of severe maternal morbidity.

OBJECTIVE: To validate the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) 12-item tool against the 36-item version for measuring functioning and disability associated with pregnancy and the occurrence of maternal morbidity. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of the Brazilian retrospective cohort study on long-term repercussions of severe maternal morbidity (SMM) among women who delivered at a tertiary facility (COMMAG study). We compared WHODAS-12 and WHODAS-36 scores of women with and without SMM using measures of central tendency and variability, tests for instruments' agreement (Bland-Altman plot), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and Cronbach alpha coefficient for internal consistency. RESULTS: The COMMAG study enrolled 638 women up to 5 years postpartum. Although the median WHODAS-36 and -12 scores for all women were statistically different (13.04 and 11.76, respectively; P<0.001), there was a strong linear correlation between them. Furthermore, the mean difference and the differences in variance analyses demonstrated agreement of total scores between the two versions. CFA demonstrated how the WHODAS-12 questions are divided into six previously defined factors and Cronbach alpha showed good internal consistency. CONCLUSION: WHODAS-12 demonstrated agreement with WHODAS-36 for total score and was a good instrument for screening functioning and disability among postpartum women, with and without SMM.

The impact of hypertension, hemorrhage, and other maternal morbidities on functioning in the postpartum period as assessed by the WHODAS 2.0 36-item tool.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the scores of postpartum women using the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 36-item tool (WHODAS-36), considering different morbidities. METHODS: Secondary analysis of a retrospective cohort of women who delivered at a referral maternity in Brazil and were classified with and without severe maternal morbidity (SMM). WHODAS-36 was used to assess functioning in postpartum women. Percentile distribution of total WHODAS score was compared across three groups: Percentile (P)<10, 1090. Cases of SMM were categorized and WHODAS-36 score was assessed according to hypertension, hemorrhage, or other conditions. RESULTS: A total of 638 women were enrolled: 64 had mean scores below P<10 (1.09) and 66 were above P>90 (41.3). Of women scoring above P>90, those with morbidity had a higher mean score than those without (44.6% vs 36.8%, P=0.879). Women with higher WHODAS-36 scores presented more complications during pregnancy, especially hypertension (47.0% vs 37.5%, P=0.09). Mean scores among women with any complication were higher than those with no morbidity (19.0 vs 14.2, P=0.01). WHODAS-36 scores were higher among women with hypertensive complications (19.9 vs 16.0, P=0.004), but lower among those with hemorrhagic complications (13.8 vs 17.7, P=0.09). CONCLUSIONS: Complications during pregnancy, childbirth, and the puerperium increase long-term WHODAS-36 scores, demonstrating a persistent impact on functioning among women, up to 5 years postpartum.

Sexual life and dysfunction after maternal morbidity: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Because there is a lack of knowledge on the long-term consequences of maternal morbidity/near miss episodes on women's sexual life and function we conducted a systematic review with the purpose of identifying the available evidence on any sexual impairment associated with complications from pregnancy and childbirth. METHODS: Systematic review on aspects of women sexual life after any maternal morbidity and/or maternal near miss, during different time periods after delivery. The search was carried out until May 22(nd), 2015 including studies published from 1995 to 2015. No language or study design restrictions were applied. Maternal morbidity as exposure was split into general or severe/near miss. Female sexual outcomes evaluated were dyspareunia, Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) scores and time to resume sexual activity after childbirth. Qualitative syntheses for outcomes were provided whenever possible. RESULTS: A total of 2,573 studies were initially identified, and 14 were included for analysis after standard selection procedures for systematic review. General morbidity was mainly related to major perineal injury (3(rd) or 4(th) degree laceration, 12 studies). A clear pattern for severity evaluation of maternal morbidity could not be distinguished, unless when a maternal near miss concept was used. Women experiencing maternal morbidity had more frequently dyspareunia and resumed sexual activity later, when compared to women without morbidity. There were no differences in FSFI scores between groups. Meta-analysis could not be performed, since included studies were too heterogeneous regarding study design, evaluation of exposure and/or outcome and time span. CONCLUSION: Investigation of long-term repercussions on women's sexual life aspects after maternal morbidity has been scarcely performed, however indicating worse outcomes for those experiencing morbidity. Further standardized evaluation of these conditions among maternal morbidity survivors may provide relevant information for clinical follow-up and reproductive planning for women.