Search

Objective: The My Baby's Movements (MBM) trial aimed to evaluate the impact on stillbirth rates of a multifaceted awareness package (the MBM intervention). Design: Stepped‐wedge cluster‐randomised controlled trial. Setting: Twenty‐seven maternity hospitals in Australia and New Zealand. Population: Women with a singleton pregnancy without major fetal anomaly at ≥28 weeks of gestation from August 2016 to May 2019. Methods: The MBM intervention was implemented at randomly assigned time points, with the sequential introduction of eight groups of between three and five hospitals at 4‐monthly intervals. Using generalised linear mixed models, the stillbirth rate was compared in the control and the intervention periods, adjusting for calendar time, study population characteristics and hospital effects. Main outcome measures: Stillbirth at ≥28 weeks of gestation. Results: There were 304 850 births with 290 105 births meeting the inclusion criteria: 150 053 in the control and 140 052 in the intervention periods. The stillbirth rate was lower (although not statistically significantly so) during the intervention compared with the control period (2.2/1000 versus 2.4/1000 births; aOR 1.18, 95% CI 0.93–1.50; P = 0.18). The decrease in stillbirth rate was greater across calendar time: 2.7/1000 in the first versus 2.0/1000 in the last 18 months. No increase in secondary outcomes, including obstetric intervention or adverse neonatal outcome, was evident. Conclusions: The MBM intervention did not reduce stillbirths beyond the downward trend over time. As a result of low uptake, the role of the intervention remains unclear, although the downward trend across time suggests some benefit in lowering the stillbirth rate. In this study setting, an awareness of the importance of fetal movements may have reached pregnant women and clinicians prior to the implementation of the intervention. The My Baby's Movements intervention to raise awareness of decreased fetal movement did not significantly reduce stillbirth rates. The My Baby's Movements intervention to raise awareness of decreased fetal movement did not significantly reduce stillbirth rates. Linked article This article is commented on by Alexander E. P. Heazell, p. 42 in this issue. To view this mini commentary visit https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.16954. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Parent engagement in perinatal mortality review meetings following stillbirth may benefit parents and improve patient safety. We investigated perinatal mortality review meeting practices, including the extent of parent engagement, based on self‐reports from healthcare professionals from maternity care facilities in six high‐income countries. Design: Cross‐sectional online survey. Setting: Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, UK and USA. Population: A total of 1104 healthcare professionals, comprising mainly obstetricians, gynaecologists, midwives and nurses. Methods: Data were drawn from responses to a survey covering stillbirth‐related topics. Open‐ and closed‐items that focused on 'Data quality on causes of stillbirth' were analysed. Main outcome measures: Healthcare professionals' self‐reported practices around perinatal mortality review meetings following stillbirth. Results: Most clinicians (81.0%) were aware of regular audit meetings to review stillbirth at their maternity facility, although this was true for only 35.5% of US respondents. For the 854 respondents whose facility held regular meetings, less than a third (31.1%) reported some form of parent engagement, and this was usually in the form of one‐way post‐meeting feedback. Across all six countries, only 17.1% of respondents described an explicit approach where parents provided input, received feedback and were represented at meetings. Conclusions: We found no established practice of involving parents in the perinatal mortality review process in six high‐income countries. Parent engagement may hold the key to important lessons for stillbirth prevention and care. Further understanding of approaches, barriers and enablers is warranted. Parent engagement in mortality review after stillbirth is rare, based on data from six countries. We need to understand the barriers. Parent engagement in mortality review after stillbirth is rare, based on data from six countries. We need to understand the barriers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare clinical outcomes following induction of labour (IOL) using a balloon catheter and going home, versus prostaglandin (PG) as an inpatient.Design: Randomised controlled trial.Setting: Eight Australian maternity hospitals.Population: Women with uncomplicated term singleton pregnancies undergoing IOL for low-risk indications including post-term, advanced maternal age and 'social' reasons.Methods: Between September 2015 and October 2018, 347 women were randomised to a balloon outpatient group and 348 to a PG inpatient group. The PG group received Dinoprostone, either 2 mg gel or 10 mg controlled-release tape. The balloon group had a double-balloon catheter inserted and went home.Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was a composite neonatal measure comprising nursery admission, intubation/cardiac compressions, acidaemia, hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy, seizure, infection, pulmonary hypertension, stillbirth or death. Clinical and process outcomes are reported.Results: There were no statistically significant differences in the primary outcome comparing balloon with PG (18.6% versus 25.8%; relative risk = 0.77, 95% CI 0.51-1.02; P = 0.070), cord arterial pH <7.10 (3.5% versus 9.2%; P = 0.072), nursery admissions (12.6% versus 15.5%; P = 0.379), neonatal antibiotic use (12.1% versus 17.6%; P = 0.103), or mode of birth. Nulliparous women in the balloon group had lower rates of the primary outcome (20.4% versus 31.0%;P = 0.032); Parous women were less likely to have an unassisted vaginal birth (77.6% versus 92.3%; P = 0.045).Conclusions: Balloon catheters may be a superior method of cervical priming for nulliparous women, whereas this may not be the case for parous women. It is feasible that nulliparous women go home after commencing balloon catheter IOL, and the likelihood of adverse outcomes is low.Tweetable Abstract: Multicentre trial shows outpatient induction using balloon catheter is safe and feasible for nulliparous women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Stillbirth has a profound impact on women, families, and healthcare workers. The burden is highest in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). There is need for respectful and supportive care for women, partners, and families after bereavement.Objective: To perform a qualitative meta-summary of parents' and healthcare professionals' experiences of care after stillbirth in LMICs.Search Strategy: Search terms were formulated by identifying all synonyms, thesaurus terms, and variations for stillbirth. Databases searched were AMED, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsychINFO, BNI, CINAHL.Selection Criteria: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method studies that addressed parents' or healthcare professionals' experience of care after stillbirth in LMICs.Data Collection and Analysis: Studies were screened, and data extracted in duplicate. Data were analysed using the Sandelowski meta-summary technique that calculates frequency and intensity effect sizes (FES/IES).Main Results: In all, 118 full texts were screened, and 34 studies from 17 countries were included. FES range was 15-68%. Most studies had IES 1.5-4.5. Women experience a broad range of manifestations of grief following stillbirth, which may not be recognised by healthcare workers or in their communities. Lack of recognition exacerbates negative experiences of stigmatisation, blame, devaluation, and loss of social status. Adequately developed health systems, with trained and supported staff, are best equipped to provide the support and information that women want after stillbirth.Conclusions: Basic interventions could have an immediate impact on the experiences of women and their families after stillbirth. Examples include public education to reduce stigma, promoting the respectful maternity care agenda, and investigating stillbirth appropriately.Tweetable Abstract: Reducing stigma, promoting respectful care and investigating stillbirth have a positive impact after stillbirth for women and families in LMICs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We explore preterm-related neonatal deaths using the WHO application of the International Classification of Disease (ICD-10) to deaths during the perinatal period: ICD-PM as an informative case study, where ICD-PM can improve data use to guide clinical practice and programmatic decision-making.Design: Retrospective application of ICD-PM.Setting: South Africa, and the UK.Population: Perinatal death databases.Methods: Descriptive analysis of neonatal deaths and maternal conditions present.Main Outcome Measures: Causes of preterm neonatal mortality and associated maternal conditions.Results: We included 98 term and 173 preterm early neonatal deaths from South Africa, and 956 term and 3248 preterm neonatal deaths from the UK. In the South African data set, the main causes of death were respiratory/cardiovascular disorders (34.7%), low birthweight/prematurity (29.2%), and disorders of cerebral status (25.5%). Amongst preterm deaths, low birthweight/prematurity (43.9%) and respiratory/cardiovascular disorders (32.4%) were the leading causes. In the data set from the UK, the leading causes of death were low birthweight/prematurity (31.6%), congenital abnormalities (27.4%), and deaths of unspecified cause (26.1%). In the preterm deaths, the leading causes were low birthweight/prematurity (40.9%) and deaths of unspecified cause (29.6%). In South Africa, 61% of preterm deaths resulted from the maternal condition of preterm spontaneous labour. Among the preterm deaths in the data set from the UK, no maternal condition was present in 36%, followed by complications of placenta, cord, and membranes (23%), and other complications of labour and delivery (22%).Conclusions: ICD-PM can be used to appraise the maternal and newborn conditions contributing to preterm deaths, and can inform practice.Tweetable Abstract: ICD-PM can be used to appraise maternal and newborn contributors to preterm deaths to improve quality of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The WHO application of the tenth edition of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) to deaths during the perinatal period (ICD Perinatal Mortality, ICD-PM) captures the essential characteristics of the mother-baby dyad that contribute to perinatal deaths. We compare the capture of maternal conditions in the existing ICD-PM with the maternal codes from the WHO application of ICD-10 to deaths during pregnancy, childbirth, and the puerperium (ICD Maternal Mortality, ICD-MM) to explore potential benefits in the quality of data received.Design: Retrospective application of ICD-PM.Setting: South Africa and the UK.Population: Perinatal death databases.Methods: The maternal conditions were classified using the ICD-PM groupings for maternal condition in perinatal death, and then mapped to the ICD-MM groupings of maternal conditions.Main Outcome Measures: Main maternal conditions in perinatal deaths.Results: We reviewed 9661 perinatal deaths. The largest group (4766 cases, 49.3%) in both classifications captures deaths where there was no contributing maternal condition. Each of the other ICD-PM groups map to between three and six ICD-MM groups. If the cases in each ICD-PM group are re-coded using ICD-MM, each group becomes multiple, more specific groups. For example, the 712 cases in group M4 in ICD-PM become 14 different and more specific main disease categories when the ICD-MM is applied instead.Conclusions: As we move towards ICD-11, the use of the more specific, applicable, and relevant codes outlined in ICD-MM for both maternal deaths and the maternal condition at the time of a perinatal death would be preferable, and would provide important additional information about perinatal deaths.Tweetable Abstract: Improving the capture of maternal conditions in perinatal deaths provides important actionable information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the ICD-PM perinatal period deaths classification being developed by the World Health Organization based on existing International Classification of Diseases-10 (ICD-10) codes. Topics include reference to unrecognized stillbirths or neonatal deaths, unifying perinatal death classification system with the contributing maternal factors as well as convened groups of experts such as obstetricians and neonatologists. Also mentioned are ICD-MM codes and the epidemiologists.

Objective: To apply the World Health Organization (WHO) Application of the International Classification of Diseases, tenth revision (ICD-10) to deaths during the perinatal period: ICD-Perinatal Mortality (ICD-PM) to existing perinatal death databases.Design: Retrospective application of ICD-PM.Setting: South Africa, UK.Population: Perinatal death databases.Methods: Deaths were grouped according to timing of death and then by the ICD-PM cause of death. The main maternal condition at the time of perinatal death was assigned to each case.Main Outcome Measures: Causes of perinatal mortality, associated maternal conditions.Results: In South Africa 344/689 (50%) deaths occurred antepartum, 11% (n = 74) intrapartum and 39% (n = 271) in the early neonatal period. In the UK 4377/9067 (48.3%) deaths occurred antepartum, with 457 (5%) intrapartum and 4233 (46.7%) in the neonatal period. Antepartum deaths were due to unspecified causes (59%), chromosomal abnormalities (21%) or problems related to fetal growth (14%). Intrapartum deaths followed acute intrapartum events (69%); neonatal deaths followed consequences of low birthweight/ prematurity (31%), chromosomal abnormalities (26%), or unspecified causes in healthy mothers (25%). Mothers were often healthy; 53%, 38% and 45% in the antepartum, intrapartum and neonatal death groups, respectively. Where there was a maternal condition, it was most often maternal medical conditions, and complications of placenta, cord and membranes.Conclusions: The ICD-PM can be a globally applicable perinatal death classification system that emphasises the need for a focus on the mother-baby dyad as we move beyond 2015.Tweetable Abstract: ICD-PM is a global system that classifies perinatal deaths and links them to maternal conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Decreased fetal movement is associated with adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes; timely reporting and appropriate management may prevent stillbirth.Objectives: Determine effects of interventions to enhance maternal awareness of decreased fetal movement.Search Strategy: Cinahl, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and SCOPUS databases; without limitation on language or publication year.Selection Criteria: Randomised or non-randomised studies evaluating interventions to enhance maternal awareness of decreased fetal movement.Data Collection and Analysis: Two authors independently extracted data and assessed quality.Main Results: We included 23 publications from 16 studies of fair to poor quality. We were unable to pool results due to substantial heterogeneity between studies. Three randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and five non-randomised studies (NRSs), involving 72 888 and 115 435 pregnancies, respectively, assessed effects of interventions on stillbirth and perinatal death. One large cluster RCT (n = 68 654) reported no stillbirth reduction, one RCT (n = 3111) reported significant stillbirth reduction, and one RCT (n = 1123) was small with no deaths. All NRSs favoured intervention over standard care; three studies (n = 31 131) reported significant reduction, whereas two studies (n = 84 304) reported non-significant reductions in stillbirth or perinatal deaths. Promising results from NRSs warrant further research. We found no evidence of increased maternal concern following interventions. No cost-effectiveness data were available.Conclusions: We found no clear evidence of benefit or harm; indirect evidence suggests improved pregnancy and birth outcomes. The optimal approach to support women in monitoring their pregnancies needs to be established. Meanwhile, women need to be informed about the importance of fetal movement for fetal health.Tweetable Abstract: The benefits and risks of interventions to increase pregnant women's awareness of fetal movement are unclear. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To determine whether the disparity gap is closing between stillbirth rates for Indigenous and non-Indigenous women and to identify focal areas for future prevention efforts according to gestational age and geographic location.Design: Population-based retrospective cohort study.Setting: Queensland, Australia.Population: All singleton births of at least 20 weeks of gestation or at least 400 g birthweight.Methods: Routinely collected data on births were obtained for the period 1995 to 2011. Indigenous and non-Indigenous stillbirth rates and percent reduction in the gap were compared over time and by geographic location and gestational age.Main Outcome Measures: All-cause and cause-specific stillbirth rates (per 1000 ongoing pregnancies).Results: Over the study period there was a 57.3% reduction in the disparity gap. Although marked reductions in the gap were shown for women in regional (57.0%) and remote (56.1%) locations, these women remained at increased risk compared with those in urban regions. There was no reduction for term stillbirths. Major conditions contributing to the disparity were maternal conditions (diabetes) (relative risk [RR] 3.78, 95% confidence intervals [95% CI] 2.59-5.51), perinatal infection (RR 3.70, 95% CI 2.54-5.39), spontaneous preterm birth (RR 3.08, 95% CI 2.51-3.77), hypertension (RR 2.22, 95% CI 1.45-3.39), fetal growth restriction (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.17-2.71) and antepartum haemorrhage (RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.13-2.22).Conclusions: The gap in stillbirth rates between Indigenous and non-Indigenous women is closing, but Indigenous women continue to be at increased risk due to a number of potentially preventable conditions. There is little change in the gap at term gestational ages. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Stillbirth is a major global public health problem but in the absence of a robust method to predict a woman's individualised risk of stillbirth, identifying women at increased risk remains a challenge. Improving the quality of prediction models with internal and external validation, transparent reporting and consideration for clinical translation, is necessary to make them useful for detecting individualised stillbirth risk and informing clinical decision-making. [Extracted from the article]

Stillbirth is a persistent public health problem with enormous impacts on parents, families and communities (de Bernis et al. I Lancet i 2016;387:703-16). The care of health workers and community is vital to parents' recovery after stillbirth (Flenady et al. I BJOG i 2014;121:137-40). Health workers confronted with such losses need training, support and culturally specific and context-specific care guidelines. [Extracted from the article]

The article discusses the issues relating to stillbirth in Latin America. Topics discussed include inverse relationship between Gross domestic product (GDP) per capita and women's schooling; challenges of interventions to reduce stillbirth rates in Latin America; and the information on the causes of stillbirth.