An evaluation of classification systems for stillbirth

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Audit and classification of stillbirths is an essential part of clinical practice and a crucial step towards stillbirth prevention. Due to the limitations of the ICD system and lack of an international approach to an acceptable solution, numerous disparate classification systems have emerged. We assessed the performance of six contemporary systems to inform the development of an internationally accepted approach.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We evaluated the following systems: Amended Aberdeen, Extended Wigglesworth; PSANZ-PDC, ReCoDe, Tulip and CODAC. Nine teams from 7 countries applied the classification systems to cohorts of stillbirths from their regions using 857 stillbirth cases. The main outcome measures were: the ability to retain the important information about the death using the <it>InfoKeep </it>rating; the ease of use according to the <it>Ease </it>rating (both measures used a five-point scale with a score <2 considered unsatisfactory); inter-observer agreement and the proportion of unexplained stillbirths. A randomly selected subset of 100 stillbirths was used to assess inter-observer agreement.</p> <p>Results</p> <p><it>InfoKeep </it>scores were significantly different across the classifications (<it>p </it>≤ 0.01) due to low scores for Wigglesworth and Aberdeen. CODAC received the highest mean (SD) score of 3.40 (0.73) followed by PSANZ-PDC, ReCoDe and Tulip [2.77 (1.00), 2.36 (1.21), 1.92 (1.24) respectively]. Wigglesworth and Aberdeen resulted in a high proportion of unexplained stillbirths and CODAC and Tulip the lowest. While <it>Ease </it>scores were different (<it>p </it>≤ 0.01), all systems received satisfactory scores; CODAC received the highest score. Aberdeen and Wigglesworth showed poor agreement with kappas of 0.35 and 0.25 respectively. Tulip performed best with a kappa of 0.74. The remainder had good to fair agreement.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The Extended Wigglesworth and Amended Aberdeen systems cannot be recommended for classification of stillbirths. Overall, CODAC performed best with PSANZ-PDC and ReCoDe performing well. Tulip was shown to have the best agreement and a low proportion of unexplained stillbirths. The virtues of these systems need to be considered in the development of an international solution to classification of stillbirths. Further studies are required on the performance of classification systems in the context of developing countries. Suboptimal agreement highlights the importance of instituting measures to ensure consistency for any classification system.</p

Classification of perinatal deaths: Development of the Australian and New Zealand classifications

Classifications of perinatal deaths have been undertaken for surveillance of causes of death, but also for auditing individual deaths to identify suboptimal care at any level, so that preventive strategies may be implemented. This paper describes the history and development of the paired obstetric and neonatal Perinatal Society of Australia and New Zealand (PSANZ) classifications in the context of other classifications. The PSANZ Perinatal Death Classification is based on obstetric antecedent factors that initiated the sequence of events leading to the death, and was developed largely from the Aberdeen and Whitfield classifications. The PSANZ Neonatal Death Classification is based on fetal and neonatal factors associated with the death. The classifications, accessible on the PSANZ website (http://www.psanz.org), have definitions and guidelines for use, a high level of agreement between classifiers, and are now being used in nearly all Australian states and New Zealand