Causes and investigation of stillbirths in Brazil: A multicentre cross-sectional study in 10 referral maternity hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: Understanding the local characteristics and statistics related to stillbirths may be the first step in a series of strategies associated with a reduction in stillbirth ratio. The aim of this study was to estimate the fetal mortality ratio and evaluate the investigation processes related to the causes of death, comparing the investigation according to the specific cause of death. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was retrospectively conducted in 10 tertiary obstetric care centers. Medical records of women with stillbirth managed between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2018 were analyzed and classified, according to sociodemographic characteristics, and gestational and childbirth data, culminating in stillbirth. The stillbirth ratio and its causes were presented in proportions for the study period and individually for each health facility. RESULTS: Cases of 3390 stillbirths were analyzed. The stillbirth ratio varied from 10.74/1000 live births (LBs) in 2009 to 9.31/1000 in 2018. "Intrauterine hypoxia and asphyxia" (ICD-10 P20) and "unspecific causes of death" (ICD-10 P95) represented 40.8% of the causes of death. Investigation for TORCHS and diabetes occurred in 90.8% and 61.4% of deaths, respectively. Placental and necroscopic tests were performed in 36.6% of the cases. CONCLUSION: The adoption of a rational and standardized investigation of stillbirth remains an unmet need; the use of additional tests and examinations are lacking, especially when unspecific causes are attributed.

Investigation of stillbirths in Brazil: A systematic scoping review of the causes and related reporting processes in the past decade.

BACKGROUND: Recognizing the causes of stillbirths and their associated conditions is essential to reduce its occurrence. OBJECTIVE: To describe information on stillbirths in Brazil during the past decade. SEARCH STRATEGY: A literature search was performed from January 2010 to December 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: Original observational studies and clinical trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were manually extracted to a spreadsheet and descriptive analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 55 studies were included; 40 studies (72.2%) used the official data stored by national public health systems. Most articles aimed to estimate the rate and trends of stillbirth (60%) or their causes (55.4%). Among the 16 articles addressing the causes of death, 10 (62.5%) used the International Classification of Diseases; most of the articles only specified the main cause of death. Intrauterine hypoxia was the main cause reported (ranging from 14.3% to 54.9%). CONCLUSION: Having a national system based on compulsory notification of stillbirths may not be sufficient to provide quality information on occurrence and, especially, causes of death. Further improvements of the attribution and registration of causes of deaths and the implementation of educational actions for improving reporting systems are advisable. Finally, expanding the investigation of contributing factors associated with stillbirths would create an opportunity for further development of prevention strategies in low- and middle-income countries such as Brazil.

The COVID-19 pandemic in Brazilian pregnant and postpartum women: results from the REBRACO prospective cohort study.

Brazil presented a very high number of maternal deaths and evident delays in healthcare. We aimed at evaluating the characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 infection and associated outcomes in the obstetric population. We conducted a prospective cohort study in 15 Brazilian centers including symptomatic pregnant or postpartum women with suspected COVID-19 from Feb/2020 to Feb/2021. Women were followed from suspected infection until the end of pregnancy. We analyzed maternal characteristics and pregnancy outcomes associated with confirmed COVID-19 infection and SARS, determining unadjusted risk ratios. In total, 729 symptomatic women with suspected COVID-19 were initially included. Among those investigated for COVID-19, 51.3% (n = 289) were confirmed COVID-19 and 48% (n = 270) were negative. Initially (before May 15th), only 52.9% of the suspected cases were tested and it was the period with the highest proportion of ICU admission and maternal deaths. Non-white ethnicity (RR 1.78 [1.04-3.04]), primary schooling or less (RR 2.16 [1.21-3.87]), being overweight (RR 4.34 [1.04-19.01]) or obese (RR 6.55 [1.57-27.37]), having public prenatal care (RR 2.16 [1.01-4.68]), planned pregnancies (RR 2.09 [1.15-3.78]), onset of infection in postpartum period (RR 6.00 [1.37-26.26]), chronic hypertension (RR 2.15 [1.37-4.10]), pre-existing diabetes (RR 3.20 [1.37-7.46]), asthma (RR 2.22 [1.14-4.34]), and anaemia (RR 3.15 [1.14-8.71]) were associated with higher risk for SARS. The availability of tests and maternal outcomes varied throughout the pandemic period of the study; the beginning was the most challenging period, with worse outcomes. Socially vulnerable, postpartum and previously ill women were more likely to present SARS related to COVID-19.

Preeclampsia among women with COVID-19 during pregnancy and its impact on maternal and perinatal outcomes: Results from a national multicenter study on COVID in Brazil, the REBRACO initiative.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prevalence of preeclampsia among cases of COVID-19 infection during pregnancy and the association between both conditions, in a multicenter cohort of Brazilian women with respiratory symptoms. STUDY DESIGN: Ancillary analysis of the Brazilian Network of COVID-19 in Obstetrics (REBRACO) study. We performed a nested case-control analysis selecting all women with COVID-19 and compared outcomes between women with and without PE. MAIN OUTCOMES: Maternal, gestational, and clinical characteristics and perinatal outcomes. MEASURES: Prevalence ratio (PR) and its 95%CI for each of the predictors and outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 203 women were included: 21 (10.3%) in PE group and 182 (89.7%) in non-PE group. Preeclampsia was not different among women with and without COVID-19 (10.3% vs 13.1%, p-value = 0.41), neither complication such as eclampsia and HELLP syndrome. Chronic hypertension (33.4%) (p < 0.01) and obesity (60.0%) (p = 0.03) were the most frequent comorbidities in PE group, and they were significantly more frequent in this group. Women with PE had more cesarean section (RR 5.54 [1.33 - 23.14]) and their neonates were more frequently admitted to neonatal intensive care unit (PR 2.46[1.06 - 5.69]), most likely due to preterm-birth-related complications. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of PE among women with COVID-19 infection during pregnancy was around 10%; women with COVID-19 and a history of chronic hypertension or obesity are more likely to have preeclampsia. Cesarean section is increased among women with PE and COVID-19, with increased rates of neonatal admission to intensive care units, mostly due to prematurity.

Fetal deaths in Brazil: What changed in the last decade and what can we learn from the current situation?

OBJECTIVE: To determine fetal death rates (FDRs) according to maternal characteristics in Brazil. METHODS: A serial cross-sectional analysis was conducted based on vital statistics of the Brazilian population from 2007 to 2019. FDRs were estimated according to maternal and pregnancy characteristics. Annual percent change (APC) of FDR was assessed by joinpoint regression model. Causes of death were compared between the ante-/intrapartum periods. RESULTS: A significant reduction in FDR occurred in Brazil during 2007-2019 (11.1 and 10.43 in 2007 and 2019, respectively; APC -0.44). Only the northern region showed an increase in FDR. In 2019, the northeast and southeast had the highest and lowest FDRs, respectively (11.4 and 7.8/1000 live births). In adolescents, FDR increased from 2007 to 2016 (APC 1.75). In 2019, missing information was significantly high for maternal skin color (99.7%), schooling (17.0%), and age (7.0%) in fetal death registries. The most common causes of fetal death in the ante-/intrapartum periods were fetus and newborn affected by maternal conditions. CONCLUSION: A reduction in FDR has been achieved in Brazil over the last decade. However, there is an unmet need for decreasing social and regional disparities. A better system to attribute causes of death is needed to identifying priorities in maternal-fetal health care.

Facing the COVID-19 pandemic inside maternities in Brazil: A mixed-method study within the REBRACO initiative.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 pandemic posed major challenges in obstetric health care services. Preparedness, development, and implementation of new protocols were part of the needed response. This study aims to describe the strategies implemented and the perspectives of health managers on the challenges to face the pandemic in 16 different maternity hospitals that comprise a multicenter study in Brazil, called REBRACO (Brazilian network of COVID-19 during pregnancy). METHODS: Mixed-method study, with quantitative and qualitative approaches. Quantitative data on the infrastructure of the units, maternal and perinatal health indicators, modifications on staff and human resources, from January to July/2020. Also, information on total number of cases, and availability for COVID-19 testing. A qualitative study by purposeful and saturation sampling was undertaken with healthcare managers, to understand perspectives on local challenges in facing the pandemic. RESULTS: Most maternities early implemented their contingency plan. REBRACO centers reported 338 confirmed COVID-19 cases among pregnant and post-partum women up to July 2020. There were 29 maternal deaths and 15 (51.8%) attributed to COVID-19. All maternities performed relocation of beds designated to labor ward, most (75%) acquired mechanical ventilators, only the minority (25%) installed new negative air pressure rooms. Considering human resources, around 40% hired extra health professionals and increased weekly workload and the majority (68.7%) also suspended annual leaves. Only one center implemented universal screening for childbirth and 6 (37.5%) implemented COVID-19 testing for all suspected cases, while around 60% of the centers only tested moderate/severe cases with hospital admission. Qualitative results showed that main challenges experienced were related to the fear of the virus, concerns about reliability of evidence and lack of resources, with a clear need for mental health support among health professionals. CONCLUSION: Study findings suggest that maternities of the REBRACO initiative underwent major changes in facing the pandemic, with limitations on testing, difficulties in infrastructure and human resources. Leadership, continuous training, implementation of evidence-based protocols and collaborative initiatives are key to transpose the fear of the virus and ascertain adequate healthcare inside maternities, especially in low and middle-income settings. Policy makers need to address the specificities in considering reproductive health and childbirth during the COVID-19 pandemic and prioritize research and timely testing availability.

Comparing different diagnostic approaches to severe maternal morbidity and near-miss: a pilot study in a Brazilian tertiary hospital.

OBJECTIVE: Despite recent guidelines proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO), the operational definition of maternal near-miss (MNM) is still heterogeneous. This study aimed at evaluating the pros and cons of three instruments in characterizing MNM cases. The performance of two of the three instruments was also investigated vis-à-vis the WHO criteria. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective chart review study was carried out in a tertiary maternity hospital in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The medical records of 1163 obstetric hospital admissions from January to December 2008 were reviewed. Cases were first classified as 'positive' or otherwise according to the WHO, Waterstone and literature-based criteria. A descriptive analysis was then carried out focusing on divergent classifications. Finally, diagnostic properties of the Waterstone and the literature-based criteria were calculated taking the WHO criteria as reference standard. RESULTS: There were eight maternal deaths, 157 cases classified as 'positive' by at least one of the three approaches and 998 cases without severe morbidities. Twenty-seven cases of MNM were detected according to the WHO criteria, whereas the Waterstone and the literature-based criteria identified 123 and 153 cases, respectively. Among the 130 cases identified as 'negative' by the WHO criteria and 'positive' by the Waterstone or literature-based criteria, 119 presented hypertensive disorders (91.5%). Additionally, four cases were identified exclusively by the WHO criteria because of acute thrombocytopenia (platelets<50,000). Estimates of sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and negative predictive values were all above 75% for the Waterstone and literature-based approaches, but both criteria presented positive predictive values (PPV) below 60% even with high magnitudes of MNM. CONCLUSION: These results underline that different approaches entail heterogeneous estimates of MNM. The Waterstone and the literature-based criteria are not suitable for a definitive diagnosis of MNM in view of their low PPV, but they seem adequate as a first approach in investigating MNM. While negative results by both alternative criteria virtually rule out MNM, a positive result would require a reassessment using the WHO criteria to confirm the diagnosis of maternal near-miss.