Influence of definition based versus pragmatic birth registration on international comparisons of perinatal and infant mortality: population based retrospective study

Objectives To examine variations in the registration of extremely low birthweight and early gestation births and to assess their effect on perinatal and infant mortality rankings of industrialised countries

The Registry and Follow-Up of Complex Pediatric Therapies Program of Western Canada: A Mechanism for Service, Audit, and Research after Life-Saving Therapies for Young Children

Newly emerging health technologies are being developed to care for children with complex cardiac defects. Neurodevelopmental and childhood school-related outcomes are of great interest to parents of children receiving this care, care providers, and healthcare administrators. Since the 1970s, neonatal follow-up clinics have provided service, audit, and research for preterm infants as care for these at-risk children evolved. We have chosen to present for this issue the mechanism for longitudinal follow-up of survivors that we have developed for western Canada patterned after neonatal follow-up. Our program provides registration for young children receiving complex cardiac surgery, heart transplantation, ventricular assist device support, and extracorporeal life support among others. The program includes multidisciplinary assessments with appropriate neurodevelopmental intervention, active quality improvement evaluations, and outcomes research. Through this mechanism, consistently high (96%) follow-up over two years is maintained

A parsimonious explanation for intersecting perinatal mortality curves: understanding the effect of plurality and of parity

BACKGROUND: Birth weight- and gestational age-specific perinatal mortality curves intersect when compared across categories of maternal smoking, plurality, race and other factors. No simple explanation exists for this paradoxical observation. METHODS: We used data on all live births, stillbirths and infant deaths in Canada (1991–1997) to compare perinatal mortality rates among singleton and twin births, and among singleton births to nulliparous and parous women. Birth weight- and gestational age-specific perinatal mortality rates were first calculated by dividing the number of perinatal deaths at any given birth weight or gestational age by the number of total births at that birth weight or gestational age (conventional calculation). Gestational age-specific perinatal mortality rates were also calculated using the number of fetuses at risk of perinatal death at any given gestational age. RESULTS: Conventional perinatal mortality rates among twin births were lower than those among singletons at lower birth weights and earlier gestation ages, while the reverse was true at higher birth weights and later gestational ages. When perinatal mortality rates were based on fetuses at risk, however, twin births had consistently higher mortality rates than singletons at all gestational ages. A similar pattern emerged in contrasts of gestational age-specific perinatal mortality among singleton births to nulliparous and parous women. Increases in gestational age-specific rates of growth-restriction with advancing gestational age presaged rising rates of gestational age-specific perinatal mortality in both contrasts. CONCLUSIONS: The proper conceptualization of perinatal risk eliminates the mortality crossover paradox and provides new insights into perinatal health issues

Developing and pre-testing a decision board to facilitate informed choice about delivery approach in uncomplicated pregnancy

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The rate of caesarean sections is increasing worldwide, yet medical literature informing women with uncomplicated pregnancies about relative risks and benefits of elective caesarean section (CS) compared with vaginal delivery (VD) remains scarce. A decision board may address this gap, providing systematic evidence-based information so that patients can more fully understand their treatment options. The objective of our study was to design and pre-test a decision board to guide clinical discussions and enhance informed decision-making related to delivery approach (CS or VD) in uncomplicated pregnancy.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Development of the decision board involved two preliminary studies to determine women's preferred mode of risk presentation and a systematic literature review for the most comprehensive presentation of medical risks at the time (VD and CS). Forty women were recruited to pre-test the tool. Eligible subjects were of childbearing age (18-40 years) but were not pregnant in order to avoid raising the expectation among pregnant women that CS was a universally available birth option. Women selected their preferred delivery approach and completed the Decisional Conflict Scale to measure decisional uncertainty before and after reviewing the decision board. They also answered open-ended questions reflecting what they had learned, whether or not the information had helped them to choose between birth methods, and additional information that should be included. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse sample characteristics and women's choice of delivery approach pre/post decision board. Change in decisional conflict was measured using Wilcoxon's sign rank test for each of the three subscales.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The majority of women reported that they had learned something new (n = 37, 92%) and that the tool had helped them make a hypothetical choice between delivery approaches (n = 34, 85%). Women wanted more information about neonatal risks and personal experiences. Decisional uncertainty decreased (p < 0.001) and perceived effectiveness of decisions increased (p < 0.001) post-intervention.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Non-pregnant women of childbearing age were positive about the decision board and stated their hypothetical delivery choices were informed by risk presentation, but wanted additional information about benefits and experiences. This study represents a preliminary but integral step towards ensuring women considering delivery approaches in uncomplicated pregnancies are fully informed.</p

Maternal mortality and severe morbidity associated with low-risk planned cesarean delivery versus planned vaginal delivery at term

BACKGROUND: The rate of elective primary cesarean delivery continues to rise, owing in part to the widespread perception that the procedure is of little or no risk to healthy women. METHODS: Using the Canadian Institute for Health Information's Discharge Abstract Database, we carried out a retrospective population-based cohort study of all women in Canada (excluding Quebec and Manitoba) who delivered from April 1991 through March 2005. Healthy women who underwent a primary cesarean delivery for breech presentation constituted a surrogate “planned cesarean group” considered to have undergone low-risk elective cesarean delivery, for comparison with an otherwise similar group of women who had planned to deliver vaginally. RESULTS: The planned cesarean group comprised 46 766 women v. 2 292 420 in the planned vaginal delivery group; overall rates of severe morbidity for the entire 14-year period were 27.3 and 9.0, respectively, per 1000 deliveries. The planned cesarean group had increased postpartum risks of cardiac arrest (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 5.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.1–6.3), wound hematoma (OR 5.1, 95% CI 4.6–5.5), hysterectomy (OR 3.2, 95% CI 2.2–4.8), major puerperal infection (OR 3.0, 95% CI 2.7–3.4), anesthetic complications (OR 2.3, 95% CI 2.0–2.6), venous thromboembolism (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.5–3.2) and hemorrhage requiring hysterectomy (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.2–3.8), and stayed in hospital longer (adjusted mean difference 1.47 d, 95% CI 1.46–1.49 d) than those in the planned vaginal delivery group, but a lower risk of hemorrhage requiring blood transfusion (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2–0.8). Absolute risk increases in severe maternal morbidity rates were low (e.g., for postpartum cardiac arrest, the increase with planned cesarean delivery was 1.6 per 1000 deliveries, 95% CI 1.2–2.1). The difference in the rate of in-hospital maternal death between the 2 groups was nonsignificant (p = 0.87). INTERPRETATION: Although the absolute difference is small, the risks of severe maternal morbidity associated with planned cesarean delivery are higher than those associated with planned vaginal delivery. These risks should be considered by women contemplating an elective cesarean delivery and by their physicians