Association between reduced stillbirth rates in England and regional uptake of accreditation training in customised fetal growth assessment

Objective: To assess the effect that accreditation training in fetal growth surveillance and evidence-based protocols had on stillbirth rates in England and Wales. Design: Analysis of mortality data from Office of National Statistics. Setting: England and Wales, including three National Health Service (NHS) regions (West Midlands, North East and Yorkshire and the Humber) which between 2008 and 2011 implemented training programmes in customised fetal growth assessment. Population: Live births and stillbirths in England and Wales between 2007 and 2012. Main: outcome measure Stillbirth. Results: There was a significant downward trend (p=0.03) in stillbirth rates between 2007 and 2012 in England to 4.81/1000, the lowest rate recorded since adoption of the current stillbirth definition in 1992. This drop was due to downward trends in each of the three English regions with high uptake of accreditation training, and led in turn to the lowest stillbirth rates on record in each of these regions. In contrast, there was no significant change in stillbirth rates in the remaining English regions and Wales, where uptake of training had been low. The three regions responsible for the record drop in national stillbirth rates made up less than a quarter (24.7%) of all births in England. The fall in stillbirth rate was most pronounced in the West Midlands, which had the most intensive training programme, from the preceding average baseline of 5.73/1000 in 2000–2007 to 4.47/1000 in 2012, a 22% drop which is equivalent to 92 fewer deaths a year. Extrapolated to the whole of the UK, this would amount to over 1000 fewer stillbirths each year. Conclusions: A training and accreditation programme in customised fetal growth assessment with evidence-based protocols was associated with a reduction in stillbirths in high-uptake areas and resulted in a national drop in stillbirth rates to their lowest level in 20 years

Maternal and fetal risk factors for stillbirth : population based study

Objective: To assess the main risk factors associated with stillbirth in a multiethnic English maternity population. Design: Cohort study. Setting: National Health Service region in England. Population: 92 218 normally formed singletons including 389 stillbirths from 24 weeks of gestation, delivered during 2009-11. Main outcome measure: Risk of stillbirth. Results: Multivariable analysis identified a significant risk of stillbirth for parity (para 0 and para ≥3), ethnicity (African, African-Caribbean, Indian, and Pakistani), maternal obesity (body mass index ≥30), smoking, pre-existing diabetes, and history of mental health problems, antepartum haemorrhage, and fetal growth restriction (birth weight below 10th customised birthweight centile). As potentially modifiable risk factors, maternal obesity, smoking in pregnancy, and fetal growth restriction together accounted for 56.1% of the stillbirths. Presence of fetal growth restriction constituted the highest risk, and this applied to pregnancies where mothers did not smoke (adjusted relative risk 7.8, 95% confidence interval 6.6 to 10.9), did smoke (5.7, 3.6 to 10.9), and were exposed to passive smoke only (10.0, 6.6 to 15.8). Fetal growth restriction also had the largest population attributable risk for stillbirth and was fivefold greater if it was not detected antenatally than when it was (32.0% v 6.2%). In total, 195 of the 389 stillbirths in this cohort had fetal growth restriction, but in 160 (82%) it had not been detected antenatally. Antenatal recognition of fetal growth restriction resulted in delivery 10 days earlier than when it was not detected: median 270 (interquartile range 261-279) days v 280 (interquartile range 273-287) days. The overall stillbirth rate (per 1000 births) was 4.2, but only 2.4 in pregnancies without fetal growth restriction, increasing to 9.7 with antenatally detected fetal growth restriction and 19.8 when it was not detected. Conclusion: Most normally formed singleton stillbirths are potentially avoidable. The single largest risk factor is unrecognised fetal growth restriction, and preventive strategies need to focus on improving antenatal detection

Use of Microsoft Power BI to display pregnancy related performance statistics within NHS trusts

Objective We wanted to create a dashboard that allowed midwives and doctors to monitor the performance of their NHS Trust by viewing the statistics relating to their performance in identifying babies at risk due to not growing well in the womb (small for gestational age, SGA), the single largest cause of stillbirths and subject to national guidelines and reporting requirements. Antenatal detection of SGA allows clinicians to undertake further investigations and plan for a timely delivery. Method The use of Power BI instead of a solution requiring software development allowed the data analysis team to be in control of creating the application and facilitate a streamlined updating process. We used the dashboard feature, dropdowns and radio buttons to display statistics relating to the rate of identification of SGA at antenatal ultrasound scan as a proportion of all babies that are SGA at birth (sensitivity) as well as false positivity. The dashboard is contained within the web-based application to monitor growth during antenatal care. Applying the row level security feature with DAX formula, we were able to personalise the report for each Trust depending on who logged into the web-app. Results The application facilitates monitoring performance of the service in real time, longitudinally by month, quarter and year as well benchmark cross-sectionally against network/regional and national averages. The dashboard lets clinicians access their information in a clear and secure manner without the need for a separate link. The ready availability of data allows Trusts to enact policies to improve their performance and ultimately prevent avoidable deaths, and has contributed to the year on year decline in stillbirth rates in units that have been running this application. Conclusion Development of this dashboard has resulted trusts being more aware of their own data to promote improvements in antenatal care

Controlled trial of fundal height measurement plotted on customised antenatal growth charts

Objective The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of a policy of standard antenatal care which Design Population included plotting fundal height measurements on customised antenatal charts in the community. Prospective, non-randomised, controlled, population-based study. -0 defined and separate referral areas from community to teaching hospital, with similar delivery rates and socioeconomic characteristics. A total of 1272 consecutively booked women with singleton pregnancies and dating ultrasound scans before 22 weeks of gestation. Intervention In the study area customised fundal height charts were issued to each mother at the routine hospital booking scan, on which regular fundal height measurements were to be plotted by community midwives. The charts adjusted limits according to maternal characteristics including height, weight, parity and ethnic group. Usual management in the control area included fundal height assessment by abdominal palpation and recording on a standard co-operation card. Outcome measures Antenatal detection of small and large for gestational age babies; number of antenatal investigations for fetal growth in each group. Results The study group had a significantly higher antenatal detection rate of small for gestational age babies (48% vs 29%, odds ratio 2.2, 95% confidence interval 1 . 1 4 5 ) and large for gestational age babies (46% us 24%, OR 2.6, CI 1.3-5.5). There was no increase in the study group in the overall number of scans per pregnancy done in the ultrasound department (1.2 vs 1.3, P = 0.14), but a slight decrease in repeat (two or more) third trimester scans (OR 0.8, CI 06-1.0, P = 0.08). Women in the study group had significantly fewer referrals for investigation in a pregnancy assessment centre (OR 0.7, CI 0 . 5 4 9 ; P = 0.01) and fewer admissions to the antenatal ward (OR 0.6, CI 0.4-0.7, P c 0.001). There were no differences in perinatal outcome. Conclusions Serial measurement of fundal height plotted on customised charts leads to increased antenatal detection of small and large babies. This is accompanied by fewer investigations, which is likely to represent increased confidence in the community to recognise normal fetal growth. With adjustments for physiological variables, fundal height measurements appear to be a cost effective screening method which can result in substantial improvements in the antenatal assessment of fetal growth

Stillbirths: Where? When? Why? How to make the data count?

Despite increasing attention and investment for maternal, neonatal, and child health, stillbirths remain invisible-not counted in the Millennium Development Goals, nor tracked by the UN, nor in the Global Burden of Disease metrics. At least 2·65 million stillbirths (uncertainty range 2·08 million to 3·79 million) were estimated worldwide in 2008 (≥1000 g birthweight or ≥28 weeks of gestation). 98% of stillbirths occur in low-income and middle-income countries, and numbers vary from 2·0 per 1000 total births in Finland to more than 40 per 1000 total births in Nigeria and Pakistan. Worldwide, 67% of stillbirths occur in rural families, 55% in rural sub-Saharan Africa and south Asia, where skilled birth attendance and caesarean sections are much lower than that for urban births. In total, an estimated 1·19 million (range 0·82 million to 1·97 million) intrapartum stillbirths occur yearly. Most intrapartum stillbirths are associated with obstetric emergencies, whereas antepartum stillbirths are associated with maternal infections and fetal growth restriction. National estimates of causes of stillbirths are scarce, and multiple (>35) classification systems impede international comparison. Immediate data improvements are feasible through household surveys and facility audit, and improvements in vital registration, including specific perinatal certificates and revised International Classification of Disease codes, are needed. A simple, programme-relevant stillbirth classification that can be used with verbal autopsy would provide a basis for comparable national estimates. A new focus on all deaths around the time of birth is crucial to inform programmatic investment

Stillbirth Classification-Developing an International Consensus for Research Executive Summary of a National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Workshop

Stillbirth is a major obstetric complication, with 3.2 million stillbirths worldwide and 26,000 stillbirths in the United States every year. The Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development held a workshop from October 22-24, 2007, to review the pathophysiology of conditions underlying stillbirth to define causes of death. The optimal classification system would identify the pathophysiologic entity initiating the chain of events that irreversibly led to death. Because the integrity of the classification is based on available pathologic, clinical, and diagnostic data, experts emphasized that a complete stillbirth workup should be performed. Experts developed evidence-based characteristics of maternal, fetal, and placental conditions to attribute a condition as a cause of stillbirth. These conditions include infection, maternal medical conditions, antiphospholipid syndrome, heritable thrombophilias, red cell alloimmunization, platelet alloimmunization, congenital malformations, chromosomal abnormalities including confined placental mosaicism, fetomaternal hemorrhage, placental and umbilical cord abnormalities including vasa previa and placental abruption, complications of multifetal gestation, and uterine complications. In all cases, owing to lack of sufficient knowledge about disease states and normal development, there will be a degree of uncertainty regarding whether a specific condition was indeed the cause of death. (Obstet Gynecol 2009,114:901-14

Seeking order amidst chaos: a systematic review of classification systems for causes of stillbirth and neonatal death, 2009-2014.

BACKGROUND: Each year, about 5.3 million babies die in the perinatal period. Understanding of causes of death is critical for prevention, yet there is no globally acceptable classification system. Instead, many disparate systems have been developed and used. We aimed to identify all systems used or created between 2009 and 2014, with their key features, including extent of alignment with the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) and variation in features by region, to inform the World Health Organization's development of a new global approach to classifying perinatal deaths. METHODS: A systematic literature review (CINAHL, EMBASE, Medline, Global Health, and PubMed) identified published and unpublished studies and national reports describing new classification systems or modifications of existing systems for causes of perinatal death, or that used or tested such systems, between 2009 and 2014. Studies reporting ICD use only were excluded. Data were independently double-extracted (except from non-English publications). Subgroup analyses explored variation by extent and region. RESULTS: Eighty-one systems were identified as new, modifications of existing systems, or having been used between 2009 and 2014, with an average of ten systems created/modified each year. Systems had widely varying characteristics: (i) comprehensiveness (40 systems classified both stillbirths and neonatal deaths); (ii) extent of use (systems were created in 28 countries and used in 40; 17 were created for national use; 27 were widely used); (iii) accessibility (three systems available in e-format); (iv) underlying cause of death (64 systems required a single cause of death); (v) reliability (10 systems tested for reliability, with overall Kappa scores ranging from .35-.93); and (vi) ICD alignment (17 systems used ICD codes). Regional databases were not searched, so system numbers may be underestimated. Some non-differential misclassification of systems was possible. CONCLUSIONS: The plethora of systems in use, and continuing system development, hamper international efforts to improve understanding of causes of death. Recognition of the features of currently used systems, combined with a better understanding of the drivers of continued system creation, may help the development of a truly effective global system.The Mater Research Institute, University of Queensland, AustraliaThis is the final version of the article. It first appeared from BioMed Central via http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-016-1071-

Classification systems for causes of stillbirth and neonatal death, 2009-2014: an assessment of alignment with characteristics for an effective global system.

BACKGROUND: To reduce the burden of 5.3 million stillbirths and neonatal deaths annually, an understanding of causes of deaths is critical. A systematic review identified 81 systems for classification of causes of stillbirth (SB) and neonatal death (NND) between 2009 and 2014. The large number of systems hampers efforts to understand and prevent these deaths. This study aimed to assess the alignment of current classification systems with expert-identified characteristics for a globally effective classification system. METHODS: Eighty-one classification systems were assessed for alignment with 17 characteristics previously identified through expert consensus as necessary for an effective global system. Data were extracted independently by two authors. Systems were assessed against each characteristic and weighted and unweighted scores assigned to each. Subgroup analyses were undertaken by system use, setting, type of death included and type of characteristic. RESULTS: None of the 81 systems were aligned with more than 9 of the 17 characteristics; most (82 %) were aligned with four or fewer. On average, systems were aligned with 19 % of characteristics. The most aligned system (Frøen 2009-Codac) still had an unweighted score of only 9/17. Alignment with individual characteristics ranged from 0 to 49 %. Alignment was somewhat higher for widely used as compared to less used systems (22 % v 17 %), systems used only in high income countries as compared to only in low and middle income countries (20 % vs 16 %), and systems including both SB and NND (23 %) as compared to NND-only (15 %) and SB-only systems (13 %). Alignment was higher with characteristics assessing structure (23 %) than function (15 %). CONCLUSIONS: There is an unmet need for a system exhibiting all the characteristics of a globally effective system as defined by experts in the use of systems, as none of the 81 contemporary classification systems assessed was highly aligned with these characteristics. A particular concern in terms of global effectiveness is the lack of alignment with "ease of use" among all systems, including even the most-aligned. A system which meets the needs of users would have the potential to become the first truly globally effective classification system.The Mater Research Institute of the University of Queensland, AustraliaThis is the final version of the article. It first appeared from BioMed Central via http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-016-1040-

Characteristics of a global classification system for perinatal deaths: a Delphi consensus study.

BACKGROUND: Despite the global burden of perinatal deaths, there is currently no single, globally-acceptable classification system for perinatal deaths. Instead, multiple, disparate systems are in use world-wide. This inconsistency hinders accurate estimates of causes of death and impedes effective prevention strategies. The World Health Organisation (WHO) is developing a globally-acceptable classification approach for perinatal deaths. To inform this work, we sought to establish a consensus on the important characteristics of such a system. METHODS: A group of international experts in the classification of perinatal deaths were identified and invited to join an expert panel to develop a list of important characteristics of a quality global classification system for perinatal death. A Delphi consensus methodology was used to reach agreement. Three rounds of consultation were undertaken using a purpose built on-line survey. Round one sought suggested characteristics for subsequent scoring and selection in rounds two and three. RESULTS: The panel of experts agreed on a total of 17 important characteristics for a globally-acceptable perinatal death classification system. Of these, 10 relate to the structural design of the system and 7 relate to the functional aspects and use of the system. CONCLUSION: This study serves as formative work towards the development of a globally-acceptable approach for the classification of the causes of perinatal deaths. The list of functional and structural characteristics identified should be taken into consideration when designing and developing such a system.This project was initially undertaken as part of the Harmonized Reproductive Health Registries project through the Norwegian Institute of Public Health in Partnership with the Mater Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Australia, and in collaboration with the Department of Reproductive Health and Research, WHO.This is the author accepted manuscript. It is currently under an indefinite embargo pending publication by BioMed Central