Validating the Performance of the Modified Early Obstetric Warning System Multivariable Model to Predict Maternal Intensive Care Unit Admission.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the performance of the Modified Early Obstetric Warning System (MEOWS) to predict maternal ICU admission in an obstetric population. DESIGN: Case-control study. SETTING: Two maternity units in Vancouver, Canada, one with ICU facilities, between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2011. PATIENTS: Pregnant or recently delivered (≤6 weeks) women admitted to the hospital for >24 hours. Three control patients were randomly selected per case and matched for year of admission. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Retrospective, observational, case-control validation study investigating the physiologic predictors of admission in the 24-hour period preceding either ICU admission >24 hours (cases) or following admission (control patients). Model performance was assessed based on sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values. Forty-six women were admitted to the ICU for >24 hours (0.51/1000 deliveries); the study included 138 randomly selected control patients. There were no maternal deaths in the cohort. MEOWS had high sensitivity (0.96) but low specificity (0.54) for ICU admission >24 hours, whereas ≥1 one red trigger maintained sensitivity (0.96) and improved specificity (0.73). CONCLUSION: Altering MEOWS trigger parameters may improve the accuracy of MEOWS in predicting ICU admission. Formal modelling of a MEOWS scoring system is required to support evidence-based care.

Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score Is Superior to the Obstetric-Specific Sepsis in Obstetrics Score in Predicting Mortality in Septic Obstetric Patients.

OBJECTIVES: Mortality prediction scores have been used for a long time in ICUs; however, numerous studies have shown that they over-predict mortality in the obstetric population. With sepsis remaining a major cause of obstetric mortality, we aimed to look at five mortality prediction scores (one obstetric-based and four general) in the septic obstetric population and compare them to a nonobstetric septic control group. SUBJECT AND DESIGN: Women in the age group of 16-50 years with an admission diagnosis or suspicion of sepsis were included. In a multicenter obstetric population (n = 797), these included all pregnant and postpartum patients up to 6 weeks postpartum. An age- and gender-matched control nonobstetric population was drawn from a single-center general critical care population (n = 2,461). Sepsis in Obstetric Score, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, and Multiple Organ Dysfunction Scores were all applied to patients meeting inclusion criteria in both cohorts, and their area under the receiver-operator characteristic curves was calculated to find the most accurate predictor. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 146 septic patients were found for the obstetric cohort and 299 patients for the nonobstetric control cohort. The Sepsis in Obstetric Score, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, and Multiple Organ Dysfunction Scores gave area under the receiver-operator characteristic curves of 0.67, 0.68, 0.72, 0.79, and 0.84 in the obstetric cohort, respectively, and 0.64, 0.72, 0.61, 0.78, and 0.74 in the nonobstetric cohort, respectively. The Sepsis in Obstetric Score performed similarly to all the other scores with the exception of the Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score, which was significantly better (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The Sepsis in Obstetric Score, designed specifically for sepsis in obstetric populations, was not better than general severity of illness scoring systems. Furthermore, the Sepsis in Obstetric Score performance was no different in an obstetric sepsis population compared to a nonobstetric sepsis population. The Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score is a simple organ-based score, and this result supports the use of organ-based outcome predictors in ICU even in an obstetric sepsis population.

The Usefulness of the APACHE II Score in Obstetric Critical Care: A Structured Review.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the performance of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) mortality prediction model in pregnant and recently pregnant women receiving critical care in low-, middle-, and high-income countries during the study period (1985-2015), using a structured literature review. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews, searched for articles published between 1985 and 2015. STUDY SELECTION: Twenty-five studies (24 publications), of which two were prospective, were included in the analyses. Ten studies were from high-income countries (HICs), and 15 were from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Median study duration and size were six years and 124 women, respectively. DATA SYNTHESIS: ICU admission complicates 0.48% of deliveries, and pregnant and recently pregnant women account for 1.49% of ICU admissions. One quarter were admitted while pregnant, three quarters of these for an obstetric indication and for a median of three days. The median APACHE II score was 10.9, with a median APACHE II-predicted mortality of 16.6%. Observed mortality was 4.6%, and the median standardized mortality ratio was 0.36 (interquartile range 0.23 to 0.73). The standardized mortality ratio was < 0.9 in 24 of 25 studies. Women in HICs were more frequently admitted with a medical comorbidity but were less likely to die than were women in LMICs. CONCLUSION: The APACHE II score consistently overestimates mortality risks for pregnant and recently pregnant women receiving critical care, whether they reside in HICs or LMICs. There is a need for a pregnancy-specific outcome prediction model for these women.

The influence of maternal body mass index on fetal weight estimation in twin pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE: Sonographic estimated fetal weight (EFW) is important in the management of high-risk pregnancies. The possibility that increased maternal body mass index (BMI) adversely affects EFW assessments in twin pregnancies is controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of maternal BMI on the accuracy of EFW assessments in twin gestations prospectively recruited for the ESPRiT (Evaluation of Sonographic Predictors of Restricted growth in Twins) study. STUDY DESIGN: One thousand one twin pair pregnancies were recruited. After exclusion, BMI, birthweights, and ultrasound determination of EFW (within 2 weeks of delivery) were available for 943 twin pairs. The accuracy of EFW determination was defined as the difference between EFW and actual birthweight for either twin (absolute difference and percent difference). Cells with less than 5% of the population were combined for analysis resulting in the following 3 maternal categories: (1) normal/underweight, (2) overweight, and (3) obese/extremely obese. RESULTS: Analysis of the 3 categories revealed mean absolute variation values of 184 g (8.0%) in the normal/underweight group (n = 531), 196 g (8.5%) in the overweight group (n = 278), and 206 g (8.6%) in the obese/extremely obese group (n = 134) (P = .028, which was nonsignificant after adjustment for multiple testing). Regression analysis showed no linear or log-linear relationship between BMI and the accuracy of EFW (P value for absolute difference = .11, P value for percentage difference = .27). CONCLUSION: Contrary to a commonly held clinical impression, increasing maternal BMI has no significant impact on the accuracy of EFW in twin pregnancy.