Search

Background Stillbirth, the death of a baby before birth, is associated with significant psychological and social consequences that can be mitigated by respectful and supportive bereavement care. The absence of high-level evidence to support the broad scope of perinatal bereavement practices means that offering a range of options identified as valued by parents has become an important indicator of care quality. This study aimed to describe bereavement care practices offered to parents across different high-income and middle-income countries. Methods An online survey of parents of stillborn babies was conducted between December 2014 and February 2015. Frequencies of nine practices were compared between high-income and middle-income countries. Differences in proportions of reported practices and their associated odds ratios were calculated to compare high-income and middle-income countries. Results Over three thousand parents (3041) with a self-reported stillbirth in the preceding five years from 40 countries responded. Fifteen countries had atleast 40 responses. Significant differences in the prevalence of offering nine bereavement care practices were reported by women in high-income countries (HICs) compared with women in middle-income countries (MICs). All nine practices were reported to occur significantly more frequently by women in HICs, including opportunity to see and hold their baby (OR = 4.8, 95% CI 4.0-5.9). The widespread occurrence of all nine practices was reported only for The Netherlands. Conclusions Bereavement care after stillbirth varies between countries. Future research should look at why these differences occur, their impact on parents, and whether differences should be addressed, particularly how to support effective communication, decision-making, and follow-up care.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the frequency of additional care, and parents' perceptions of quality, respectful care, in pregnancies subsequent to stillbirth. DESIGN: Multi-language web-based survey. SETTING: International. POPULATION: A total of 2716 parents, from 40 high- and middle-income countries. METHODS: Data were obtained from a broader survey of parents' experiences following stillbirth. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and stratified by geographic region. Subgroup analyses explored variation in additional care by gestational age at index stillbirth. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Frequency of additional care, and perceptions of quality, respectful care. RESULTS: The majority (66%) of parents conceived their subsequent pregnancy within 1 year of stillbirth. Additional antenatal care visits and ultrasound scans were provided for 67% and 70% of all parents, respectively, although there was wide variation across geographic regions. Care addressing psychosocial needs was less frequently provided, such as additional visits to a bereavement counsellor (10%) and access to named care provider's phone number (27%). Compared with parents whose stillbirth occurred at ≤ 29 weeks of gestation, parents whose stillbirth occurred at ≥ 30 weeks of gestation were more likely to receive various forms of additional care, particularly the option for early delivery after 37 weeks. Around half (47-63%) of all parents felt that elements of quality, respectful care were consistently applied, such as spending enough time with parents and involving parents in decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Greater attention is required to providing thoughtful, empathic and collaborative care in all pregnancies following stillbirth. Specific education and training for health professionals is needed. Fil: Wojcieszek, A.M.. The University Of Queensland; Australia Fil: Boyle, F.M.. The University Of Queensland; Australia Fil: Belizan, Jose. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. International Stillbirth Alliance; Reino Unido. Instituto de Eficacia Clínica y Política de Salud; Argentina Fil: Cassidy, J. International Stillbirth Alliance; Reino Unido. Umamanita; España Fil: Cassidy, P. International Stillbirth Alliance; Reino Unido. Umamanita; España Fil: Erwich, J.J.H.M.. International Stillbirth Alliance; Reino Unido. University of Groningen; Países Bajos Fil: Farrales, L. International Stillbirth Alliance; Reino Unido. University of British Columbia; Canadá. Research and Support Society; Canadá Fil: Gross, MM. International Stillbirth Alliance; Reino Unido. Hannover Medical School; Alemania. Universitat Zurich; Suiza Fil: Heazell, A.E.P. International Stillbirth Alliance; Reino Unido. University of Manchester; Reino Unido. Manchester Academic Health Science Centre; Reino Unido Fil: Leisher, S.H.. International Stillbirth Alliance; Reino Unido. The University Of Queensland; Australia Fil: Mills, T. University of Manchester; Reino Unido Fil: Murphy, M. International Stillbirth Alliance; Reino Unido. University College Cork; Irlanda Fil: Pettersson, K. International Stillbirth Alliance; Reino Unido. Karolinska University; Suecia Fil: Ravaldi, C. International Stillbirth Alliance; Reino Unido. Ciao Lapo Onlus; Italia Fil: Ruidiaz, J. International Stillbirth Alliance; Reino Unido. Era en Abril; Argentina Fil: Siassakos, D. International Stillbirth Alliance; Reino Unido. University of Bristol; Reino Unido Fil: Silver, R.M.. International Stillbirth Alliance; Reino Unido. University of Utah; Estados Unidos Fil: Storey, C. International Stillbirth Alliance; Reino Unido Fil: Vannacci, A. International Stillbirth Alliance; Reino Unido. Ciao Lapo Onlus; Italia. University of Florence; Italia Fil: Middleton, P. International Stillbirth Alliance; Reino Unido. South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute; Australia Fil: Ellwood, D. International Stillbirth Alliance; Reino Unido. Griffith University and Gold Coast University ; Australia Fil: Flenady, V. International Stillbirth Alliance; Reino Unido. University of Queensland; Australia

BACKGROUND: Stillbirth is a global health problem. The World Health Organization (WHO) application of the International Classification of Diseases for perinatal mortality (ICD-PM) aims to improve data on stillbirth to enable prevention. OBJECTIVES: To identify globally reported causes of stillbirth, classification systems, and alignment with the ICD-PM. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched CINAHL, EMBASE, Medline, Global Health, and Pubmed from 2009 to 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: Reports of stillbirth causes in unselective cohorts. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Pooled estimates of causes were derived for country representative reports. Systems and causes were assessed for alignment with the ICD-PM. Data are presented by income setting (low, middle, and high income countries; LIC, MIC, HIC). MAIN RESULTS: Eighty-five reports from 50 countries (489 089 stillbirths) were included. The most frequent categories were Unexplained, Antepartum haemorrhage, and Other (all settings); Infection and Hypoxic peripartum (LIC), and Placental (MIC, HIC). Overall report quality was low. Only one classification system fully aligned with ICD-PM. All stillbirth causes mapped to ICD-PM. In a subset from HIC, mapping obscured major causes. CONCLUSIONS: There is a paucity of quality information on causes of stillbirth globally. Improving investigation of stillbirths and standardisation of audit and classification is urgently needed and should be achievable in all well-resourced settings. Implementation of the WHO Perinatal Mortality Audit and Review guide is needed, particularly across high burden settings. FUNDING: HR, SH, SHL, and AW were supported by an NHMRC-CRE grant (APP1116640). VF was funded by an NHMRC-CDF (APP1123611). TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Urgent need to improve data on causes of stillbirths across all settings to meet global targets. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Background and methods Nearly three million babies are stillborn every year. These deaths have deep and long-lasting effects on parents, healthcare providers, and the society. One of the major challenges to preventing stillbirths is the lack of information about why they happen. In this study, we collected reports on the causes of stillbirth from high-, middle-, and low-income countries to: (1) Understand the causes of stillbirth, and (2) Understand how to improve reporting of stillbirths. Findings We found 85 reports from 50 different countries. The information available from the reports was inconsistent and often of poor quality, so it was hard to get a clear picture about what are the causes of stillbirth across the world. Many different definitions of stillbirth were used. There was also wide variation in what investigations of the mother and baby were undertaken to identify the cause of stillbirth. Stillbirths in all income settings (low-, middle-, and high-income countries) were most frequently reported as Unexplained, Other, and Haemorrhage (bleeding). Unexplained and Other are not helpful in understanding why a baby was stillborn. In low-income countries, stillbirths were often attributed to Infection and Complications during labour and birth. In middle- and high-income countries, stillbirths were often reported as Placental complications. Limitations We may have missed some reports as searches were carried out in English only. The available reports were of poor quality. Implications Many countries, particularly those where the majority of stillbirths occur, do not report any information about these deaths. Where there are reports, the quality is often poor. It is important to improve the investigation and reporting of stillbirth using a standardised system so that policy makers and healthcare workers can develop effective stillbirth prevention programs. All stillbirths should be investigated and reported in line with the World Health Organization standards.

Stillbirth remains a global health challenge which is greatly affected by social and economic inequality, particularly the availability and quality of maternity care. The International Stillbirth Alliance (ISA) exists to raise awareness of stillbirth and to promote global collaboration in the prevention of stillbirth and provision of appropriate care for parents whose baby is stillborn. The focus of this ISA conference was to share experiences to improve bereavement support and clinical care. These issues, relevant throughout the globe, are not discrete but closely interrelated, with both similarities and differences depending on the specific country and cultural context. Counting stillbirths and understanding the causes of stillbirth are essential not only for providing optimal care and support to parents whose babies die, but also for reducing the future burden of stillbirth. This summary highlights novel work from obstetricians, midwives, psychologists, parents and peer support organizations that was presented at the ISA meeting. It covers topics including the bereavement process, peer support for parents, support and training for staff, evidence for clinical care, and the need for accurate data on stillbirths and perinatal audits. Representatives from the maternity services of the region presented their outcome data and shared their experiences of clinical and bereavement care. Data and developments in practice within stillbirth and bereavement care must be widely disseminated and acted upon by those responsible for maternity care provision, both to prevent stillbirths and to provide high-quality care when they do occur.