Search

Abstract Background There is worldwide debate about the appropriateness of caesarean sections performed without medical indications. In this analysis, we aim to further investigate the relationship between caesarean section without medical indication and severe maternal outcomes. Methods This is a multicountry, facility-based survey that used a stratified multistage cluster sampling design to obtain a sample of countries and health institutions worldwide. A total of 24 countries and 373 health facilities participated in this study. Data collection took place during 2004 and 2005 in Africa and the Americas and during 2007 and 2008 in Asia. All women giving birth at the facility during the study period were included and had their medical records reviewed before discharge from the hospital. Univariate and multilevel analysis were performed to study the association between each group's mode of delivery and the severe maternal and perinatal outcome. Results A total of 286,565 deliveries were analysed. The overall caesarean section rate was 25.7% and a total of 1.0 percent of all deliveries were caesarean sections without medical indications, either due to maternal request or in the absence of other recorded indications. Compared to spontaneous vaginal delivery, all other modes of delivery presented an association with the increased risk of death, admission to ICU, blood transfusion and hysterectomy, including antepartum caesarean section without medical indications (Adjusted Odds Ratio (Adj OR), 5.93, 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI), 3.88 to 9.05) and intrapartum caesarean section without medical indications (Adj OR, 14.29, 95% CI, 10.91 to 18.72). In addition, this association is stronger in Africa, compared to Asia and Latin America. Conclusions Caesarean sections were associated with an intrinsic risk of increased severe maternal outcomes. We conclude that caesarean sections should be performed when a clear benefit is anticipated, a benefit that might compensate for the higher costs and additional risks associated with this operation.

Objective: To assess the maternal characteristics and causes associated with refractory postpartum haemorrhage (PPH).Design: Secondary analysis of the WHO CHAMPION trial data.Setting: Twenty-three hospitals in ten countries.Population: Women from the CHAMPION trial who received uterotonics as first-line treatment of PPH.Methods: We assessed the association between sociodemographic, pregnancy and childbirth factors and refractory PPH, and compared the causes of PPH between women with refractory PPH and women responsive to first-line PPH treatment.Main Outcome Measures: Maternal characteristics; causes of PPH.Results: Women with labour induced or augmented with uterotonics (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.35; 95% CI 1.07-1.72), with episiotomy or tears requiring suturing (aOR 1.82; 95% CI 1.34-2.48) and who had babies with birthweights ≥3500 g (aOR 1.33; 95% CI 1.04-1.69) showed significantly higher odds of refractory PPH compared with the reference categories in the multivariate analysis adjusted by centre and trial arm. While atony was the sole PPH cause in 53.2% (116/218) of the women in the responsive PPH group, it accounted for only 31.5% (45/143) of the causes in the refractory PPH group. Conversely, tears were the sole cause in 12.8% (28/218) and 28% (40/143) of the responsive PPH and refractory PPH groups, respectively. Placental problems were the sole cause in 11 and 5.6% in the responsive and refractory PPH groups, respectively.Conclusion: Women with refractory PPH showed a different pattern of maternal characteristics and PPH causes compared with those with first-line treatment responsive PPH.Tweetable Abstract: Women with refractory postpartum haemorrhage are different from those with first-line treatment responsive PPH. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is a lack of strong evidence on the effectiveness of the content, frequency, and timing of visits in standard antenatal-care programmes. We undertook a systematic review of randomised trials assessing the effectiveness of different models of antenatal care. The main hypothesis was that a model with a lower number of antenatal visits, with or without goal-oriented components, would be as effective as the standard antenatal-care model in terms of clinical outcomes, perceived satisfaction, and costs.Methods: The interventions compared were the provision of a lower number of antenatal visits (new model) and a standard antenatal-visits programme. The selected outcomes were pre-eclampsia, urinary-tract infection, postpartum anaemia, maternal mortality, low birthweight, and perinatal mortality. We also selected measures of women's satisfaction with care and cost-effectiveness. This review drew on the search strategy developed for the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group of the Cochrane Collaboration.Findings: Seven eligible randomised controlled trials were identified. 57418 women participated in these studies: 30799 in the new-model groups (29870 with outcome data) and 26619 in the standard-model groups (25821 with outcome data). There was no clinically differential effect of the reduced number of antenatal visits when the results were pooled for pre-eclampsia (typical odds ratio 0.91 [95% CI 0.66-1.26]), urinary-tract infection (0.93 [0.79-1.10]). postpartum anaemia (1.01), maternal mortality (0.91 [0.55-1.51]), or low birthweight (1.04 [0.93-1.17]). The rates of perinatal mortality were similar, although the rarity of the outcome did not allow formal statistical equivalence to be attained. Some dissatisfaction with care, particularly among women in more developed countries, was observed with the new model. The cost of the new model was equal to or less than that of the standard model.Interpretation: A model with a reduced number of antenatal visits, with or without goal-oriented components, could be introduced into clinical practice without risk to mother or baby, but some degree of dissatisfaction by the mother could be expected. Lower costs can be achieved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is worldwide debate about the appropriateness of caesarean sections performed without medical indications. In this analysis, we aim to further investigate the relationship between caesarean section without medical indication and severe maternal outcomes. Methods: This is a multicountry, facility-based survey that used a stratified multistage cluster sampling design to obtain a sample of countries and health institutions worldwide. A total of 24 countries and 373 health facilities participated in this study. Data collection took place during 2004 and 2005 in Africa and the Americas and during 2007 and 2008 in Asia. All women giving birth at the facility during the study period were included and had their medical records reviewed before discharge from the hospital. Univariate and multilevel analysis were performed to study the association between each group's mode of delivery and the severe maternal and perinatal outcome. Results: A total of 286,565 deliveries were analysed. The overall caesarean section rate was 25.7% and a total of 1.0 percent of all deliveries were caesarean sections without medical indications, either due to maternal request or in the absence of other recorded indications. Compared to spontaneous vaginal delivery, all other modes of delivery presented an association with the increased risk of death, admission to ICU, blood transfusion and hysterectomy, including antepartum caesarean section without medical indications (Adjusted Odds Ratio (Adj OR), 5.93, 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI), 3.88 to 9.05) and intrapartum caesarean section without medical indications (Adj OR, 14.29, 95% CI, 10.91 to 18.72). In addition, this association is stronger in Africa, compared to Asia and Latin America. Conclusions: Caesarean sections were associated with an intrinsic risk of increased severe maternal outcomes. We conclude that caesarean sections should be performed when a clear benefit is anticipated, a benefit that might compensate for the higher costs and additional risks associated with this operation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This is an overview of evidence of the effectiveness of antenatal care in relation to maternal mortality and serious morbidity, focused in particular on developing countries. It concentrates on the major causes of maternal mortality, and traces their antecedent morbidities and risk factors in pregnancy. It also includes interventions aimed at preventing, detecting or treating any stage along this pathway during pregnancy. This is an updated and expanded version of a review first published by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 1992. The scientific evidence from randomised controlled trials and other types of intervention or observational study on the effectiveness of these interventions is reviewed critically. The sources and quality of available data, and possible biases in their collection or interpretation are considered. As in other areas of maternal health, good-quality evidence is scarce and, just as in many aspects of health care generally, there are interventions in current practice that have not been subjected to rigorous evaluation. A table of antenatal interventions of proven effectiveness in conditions that can lead to maternal mortality or serious morbidity is presented. Interventions for which there is some promising evidence, short of proof, of effectiveness are explored, and the outstanding questions formulated. These are presented in a series of tables with suggestions about the types of study needed to answer them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the preparation of a randomised controlled trial to evaluate a new programme of antenatal care (ANC) in different parts of the world, we conducted a baseline survey of the ANC procedures in all 53 clinics participating in the trial. There were two components of this survey: (1) description of clinic characteristics and services offered: the staff of each clinic was interviewed and direct observation was made by field supervisors, and (2) the actual use of services by pregnant women attending these clinics: we reviewed a random sample of 2913 clinical histories. The clinical units surveyed were offering most of the activities, screening, laboratory tests and interventions recommended as effective according to the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Database (PCD), although some of these were not available in some sites. On the other hand, some tests and interventions that are considered not effective according to these criteria are reportedly offered. There was a difference across sites in the availability and offer to low-risk women of vaginal examination, evaluation of pelvic size, dental examination, external version for breech presentation and formal risk score classification, and a notable difference in the type of principal provider of ANC. There was a large variation in the actual use of screening and laboratory tests and interventions that should be offered to all women according to Cochrane PCD criteria: some of these are simply not available in a site; others are available, but only a fraction of women attending the clinics are receiving them. The participating sites all purport to follow the traditional ‘Western’ schedule for ANC, but in three sites we found that a high percentage of women initiate their ANC after the first trimester, and therefore do not have either the recommended minimum number of visits during pregnancy or the minimum first trimester evaluation. It is concluded that the variability and heterogeneity of ANC services provided in the four study sites are disturbing to the profession and cast doubts on the rationale of routine ANC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We discuss methodological issues arising in a recent evaluation trial of a new antenatal care programme, as sponsored by the Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction, and WHO's Division of Reproductive Health (Technical Support). The randomisation unit for the trial is the antenatal care clinic, with 53 clinics located in four countries randomly allocated to provide either the new programme or the traditional programme currently in use. Approximately 24,000 women presenting for antenatal care over an average period of 18 months will have been recruited. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The World Health Organisation and collaborating institutions in developing countries are conducting a multicentre randomised controlled trial to evaluate a new antenatal care (ANC) programme, consisting of tests, clinical procedures and follow-up actions scientifically demonstrated to be effective in improving maternal and newborn outcomes. These activities are distributed, for practical reasons, over four visits during the course of pregnancy and are aimed at achieving predetermined goals. The study is taking place in four countries, Argentina, Cuba, Saudi Arabia and Thailand. Recruitment of study subjects started on 1 May 1996. All 53 ANC clinical units had been enrolled by December 1996. Clinics in each country were randomly allocated (cluster randomisation) to provide either the new programme or the traditional programme currently in use. Approximately 24 000 women presenting for ANC at these clinics over an average period of 18 months will have been recruited. As women attending the control clinics receive the ‘best standard treatment’ as currently offered in these clinics, individual informed consent is requested only from women attending the intervention clinics. Authorities of the corresponding health districts and all participating clinics have provided written institutional informed consent before randomisation. The primary outcome of the trial in relation to maternal conditions is the rate of a morbidity indicator index, defined as the presence of at least one of the following conditions for which ANC is relevant: (a) pre-eclampsia or eclampsia during pregnancy or within 24 h of delivery; (b) postpartum anaemia (haemoglobin < 90 g/L); or (c) severe urinary tract infection/pyelonephritis, defined as an episode requiring antibiotic treatment and/or hospitalisation. The primary fetal outcome is the rate of low birthweight (< 2500 g). Adverse maternal and fetal outcomes are expected for ≈ 10% of the control group. Several maternal and perinatal secondary outcomes are also considered. A comprehensive cost-effective-ness analysis and women's and providers’ satisfaction evaluation are performed concurrently with the trial. Health-care programmes should be rigorously evaluated by randomised controlled trials, which are feasible in developing countries and should be conducted before introducing new treatments or health interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Argues for the need of an effective antenatal care policy for the deprived people of developing countries. Differences in access to care among people from Rosario, Argentina; Comparison of pregnancy complexities faced by women from upper and lower socio-economic sector; Suggestions for improvements in antenatal care programs in developing countries.

OBJECTIVE: This study estimates the costs of maternal health services in Rosario, Argentina. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The provider costs (US$ 1999) of antenatal care, a normal vaginal delivery and a caesarean section, were evaluated retrospectively in two municipal hospitals. The cost of an antenatal visit was evaluated in two health centres and the patient costs associated with the visit were evaluated in a hospital and a health centre. RESULTS: The average cost per hospital day is $114.62. The average cost of a caesarean section ($525.57) is five times greater than that of a normal vaginal delivery ($105.61). A normal delivery costs less at the general hospital and a c-section less at the maternity hospital. The average cost of an antenatal visit is $31.10. The provider cost is lower at the health centre than at the hospital. Personnel accounted for 72-94% of the total cost and drugs and medical supplies between 4-26%. On average, an antenatal visit costs women $4.70. Direct costs are minimal compared to indirect costs of travel and waiting time. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest the potential for increasing the efficiency of resource use by promoting antenatal care visits at the primary level. Women could also benefit from reduced travel and waiting time. Similar benefits could accrue to the provider by encouraging normal delivery at general hospitals, and complicated deliveries at specialised maternity hospitals.

An abstract of the article "WHO's fetal growth standards: a multinational longitudinal study of estimated fetal weight," by T. Kiserud and colleagues is presented.

Abstract Background Effective interventions to reduce mortality and morbidity in maternal and newborn health already exist. Information about quality and performance of care and the use of critical interventions are useful for shaping improvements in health care and strengthening the contribution of health systems towards the Millennium Development Goals 4 and 5. The near-miss concept and the criterion-based clinical audit are proposed as useful approaches for obtaining such information in maternal and newborn health care. This paper presents the methods of the World Health Organization Multicountry Study in Maternal and Newborn Health. The main objectives of this study are to determine the prevalence of maternal near-miss cases in a worldwide network of health facilities, evaluate the quality of care using the maternal near-miss concept and the criterion-based clinical audit, and develop the near-miss concept in neonatal health. Methods/Design This is a large cross-sectional study being implemented in a worldwide network of health facilities. A total of 370 health facilities from 29 countries will take part in this study and produce nearly 275,000 observations. All women giving birth, all maternal near-miss cases regardless of the gestational age and delivery status and all maternal deaths during the study period comprise the study population. In each health facility, medical records of all eligible women will be reviewed during a data collection period that ranges from two to three months according to the annual number of deliveries. Discussion Implementing the systematic identification of near-miss cases, mapping the use of critical evidence-based interventions and analysing the corresponding indicators are just the initial steps for using the maternal near-miss concept as a tool to improve maternal and newborn health. The findings of projects using approaches similar to those described in this manuscript will be a good starter for a more comprehensive dialogue with governments, professionals and civil societies, health systems or facilities for promoting best practices, improving quality of care and achieving better health for mothers and children.

Abstract Background and objectives Evidence-based health care requires clinicians to engage with use of evidence in decision-making at the workplace. A learner-centred, problem-based course that integrates e-learning in the clinical setting has been developed for application in obstetrics and gynaecology units. The course content uses the WHO reproductive health library (RHL) as the resource for systematic reviews. This project aims to evaluate a clinically integrated teaching programme for incorporation of evidence provided through the WHO RHL. The hypothesis is that the RHL-EBM (clinically integrated e-learning) course will improve participants' knowledge, skills and attitudes, as well as institutional practice and educational environment, as compared to the use of standard postgraduate educational resources for EBM teaching that are not clinically integrated. Methods The study will be a multicentre, cluster randomized controlled trial, carried out in seven countries (Argentina, Brazil, Democratic Republic of Congo, India, Philippines, South Africa, Thailand), involving 50-60 obstetrics and gynaecology teaching units. The trial will be carried out on postgraduate trainees in the first two years of their training. In the intervention group, trainees will receive the RHL-EBM course. The course consists of five modules, each comprising self-directed e-learning components and clinically related activities, assignments and assessments, coordinated between the facilitator and the postgraduate trainee. The course will take about 12 weeks, with assessments taking place pre-course and 4 weeks post-course. In the control group, trainees will receive electronic, self-directed EBM-teaching materials. All data collection will be online. The primary outcome measures are gain in EBM knowledge, change in attitudes towards EBM and competencies in EBM measured by multiple choice questions (MCQs) and a skills-assessing questionniare administered eletronically. These questions have been developed by using questions from validated questionnaires and adapting them to the current course. Secondary outcome measure will be educational environment towards EBM which will be assessed by a specifically developed questionnaire. Expected outcomes The trial will determine whether the RHL EBM (clinically integrated e-leraning) course will increase knowledge, skills and attitudes towards EBM and improve the educational environment as compared to standard teaching that is not clinically integrated. If effective, the RHL-EBM course can be implemented in teaching institutions worldwide in both, low-and middle income countries as well as industrialized settings. The results will have a broader impact than just EBM training because if the approach is successful then the same educational strategy can be used to target other priority clinical and methodological areas. Trial Registration ACTRN12609000198224

Abstract Background Caesarean section rates continue to increase worldwide with uncertain medical consequences. Auditing and analysing caesarean section rates and other perinatal outcomes in a reliable and continuous manner is critical for understanding reasons caesarean section changes over time. Methods We analyzed data on 97,095 women delivering in 120 facilities in 8 countries, collected as part of the 2004-2005 Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health in Latin America. The objective of this analysis was to test if the "10-group" or "Robson" classification could help identify which groups of women are contributing most to the high caesarean section rates in Latin America, and if it could provide information useful for health care providers in monitoring and planning effective actions to reduce these rates. Results The overall rate of caesarean section was 35.4%. Women with single cephalic pregnancy at term without previous caesarean section who entered into labour spontaneously (groups 1 and 3) represented 60% of the total obstetric population. Although women with a term singleton cephalic pregnancy with a previous caesarean section (group 5) represented only 11.4% of the obstetric population, this group was the largest contributor to the overall caesarean section rate (26.7% of all the caesarean sections). The second and third largest contributors to the overall caesarean section rate were nulliparous women with single cephalic pregnancy at term either in spontaneous labour (group 1) or induced or delivered by caesarean section before labour (group 2), which were responsible for 18.3% and 15.3% of all caesarean deliveries, respectively. Conclusion The 10-group classification could be easily applied to a multicountry dataset without problems of inconsistencies or misclassification. Specific groups of women were clearly identified as the main contributors to the overall caesarean section rate. This classification could help health care providers to plan practical and effective actions targeting specific groups of women to improve maternal and perinatal care.