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

Planned home and hospital births in South Australia, 1991-2006: differences in outcomes

Objective: To examine differences in outcomes between planned home births, occurring at home or in hospital, and planned hospital births. Design and setting: Population-based study using South Australian perinatal data on all births and perinatal deaths during the period 1991–2006. Analysis included logistic regression adjusted for predictor variables and standardised perinatal mortality ratios. Main outcome measures: Perinatal death, intrapartum death, death attributed to intrapartum asphyxia, Apgar score < 7 at 5 minutes, use of specialised neonatal care, operative delivery, perineal injury and postpartum haemorrhage. Results: Planned home births accounted for 0.38% of 300 011 births in South Australia. They had a perinatal mortality rate similar to that for planned hospital births (7.9 v 8.2 per 1000 births), but a sevenfold higher risk of intrapartum death (95% CI, 1.53–35.87) and a 27-fold higher risk of death from intrapartum asphyxia (95% CI, 8.02–88.83). Review of perinatal deaths in the planned home births group identified inappropriate inclusion of women with risk factors for home birth and inadequate fetal surveillance during labour. Low Apgar scores were more frequent among planned home births, and use of specialised neonatal care as well as rates of postpartum haemorrhage and severe perineal tears were lower among planned home births, but these differences were not statistically significant. Planned home births had lower caesarean section and instrumental delivery rates, and a seven times lower episiotomy rate than planned hospital births. Conclusions: Perinatal safety of home births may be improved substantially by better adherence to risk assessment, timely transfer to hospital when needed, and closer fetal surveillance.Robyn M Kennare, Marc JNC Keirse, Graeme R Tucker and Annabelle C Cha

Decision influences and aftermath: parents, stillbirth and autopsy

Article first published online: 19 JUN 2012BACKGROUND: Stillbirth, among the most distressing experiences an adult may face, is also a time when parents must decide whether an autopsy or other post-mortem examinations will be performed on their infant. Autopsies can reveal information that might help explain stillbirth, yet little is known about how people make this difficult decision. OBJECTIVES: This study examines the influences on decisions about autopsy after stillbirth among Australian parents. DESIGN: The study involved secondary analysis of transcripts of three focus groups using qualitative content analysis. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Seventeen parents of 14 stillborn babies participated in consultations around the revision of a perinatal mortality audit guideline. RESULTS: Parents shared the decision making. Four decision drivers were identified: parents' preparedness or readiness to make decisions; parental responsibility; concern for possible consequences of an autopsy and the role of health professionals. Each decision driver involved reasons both for and against autopsy. Two decision aftermath were also present: some parents who agreed to an autopsy were dissatisfied with the way the autopsy results were given to them and some parents who did not have an autopsy for their infant expressed some form of regret or uncertainty about the choice they made. CONCLUSIONS: To make decisions about autopsy after stillbirth, parents need factual information about autopsy procedures, recognition that there might be fear of blame, an environment of trust, and health services and professionals prepared and skilled for difficult conversations.Dell Horey, Vicki Flenady, Liz Conway and Emma McLeo

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