European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
Comparing different diagnostic approaches to severe maternal morbidity and near-miss: a pilot study in a Brazilian tertiary hospital
Introduction
Recent statistics provided by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations [1], [2] indicated major advances in the provision of interventions to reduce maternal deaths, including access to family planning and skilled health care during pregnancy and childbirth. A reduction in maternal mortality of approximately one third has also been observed between 1990 and 2008 [1], [2], suggesting that such interventions were somehow effective. Nevertheless, this decrease in maternal mortality is not sufficient for the fulfillment of the fifth Millennium Development Goal, which proposed a reduction of maternal mortality by three quarters between 1990 and 2015 [2]. Therefore, women's deaths during pregnancy, childbirth or the postpartum period remain an incumbent public health problem, especially in low and middle income countries.
Given this epidemiological context tarnished by a progressive yet insufficient fall in the rates of maternal deaths, several authors have advocated that the follow-up of cases in which women presented serious complications and almost died during pregnancy or childbirth would be an important strategy to assess the quality of the obstetric care [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. Cases of maternal near-miss (MNM) share several similarities with cases of maternal death and would provide valuable information about possible obstacles to address when a woman presents with acute complications during pregnancy or the puerperium [5]. Experience stemming from a detailed study of MNM cases would serve as a foundation for effective training programs for health professionals in obstetric emergencies and, consequently, allow prevention of not only these cases but also maternal deaths per se [8]. Likewise, the incidence of MNM is valuable in assessing the impact of social or medical strategies implemented to improve maternal health. In addition, auditing MNM events may allow gathering of evidence from the woman's own account, enabling a better understanding of the conditions that might have contributed to the occurrence of serious obstetric and perinatal complications [4], [9], [10].
An important limitation, however, to the widespread adoption of the near-miss concept in maternal health has been the lack of standardized theoretical and operational definitions [11], [12]. As noted by Say et al. [12], the wide variation in criteria for identifying MNM cases makes it impossible to pool data or obtain consistent worldwide summary estimates. In 2009, a WHO expert group proposed a standardized approach (Table 1) to assess MNM, arguing that uniform diagnostic criteria are crucial for the effective integration of the ‘near-miss’ concept into obstetric care and related applied research [5]. The expert group pointed out to the advantages of using this WHO standard tool: for example, standardized indicators would enable comparisons across settings and time periods, regardless of the structural characteristics of health units. Moreover, its use would enable identification of cases in which maternal death was effectively imminent and, in turn, avoid overestimating the incidence of MNM.
Although several studies have adopted the WHO criteria [13], [14], [15], [16] since its proposal, others still adhered to previous definitions [17], [18], [19], ultimately leading to a persistent difficulty in comparing estimates. This study thus aims to contribute to a better understanding of how the use of different conceptual and operational definitions affects the interpretation of studies on MNM. Besides the ‘WHO criteria’, two other approaches were evaluated. The ‘Waterstone criteria’ (Table 2) focus on major obstetrical syndromes and include solely clinical items, making it unrestrictedly useful in both low- and high-resource settings [20]. The second approach is based on comprehensive literature review (Table 2) and encompasses events/items commonly used in the scientific literature on MNM [21]. These three diagnostic tools were evaluated with respect to the (dis)agreements in typifying severe maternal morbidities or MNM cases, as well as with regard to the component items mostly accounting for the potential disparities. Taking the WHO criteria as the reference, the usefulness as a diagnostic test of both the Waterstone and literature-based approaches was also investigated.
Section snippets
Material and methods
This is a retrospective chart review study carried out at the Pedro Ernesto University Hospital, a tertiary referral maternity of the Rio de Janeiro State University in Brazil. Data collection took place in 2010 but referred to hospital admissions during pregnancy, birth or postpartum occurring between 1 January and 31 December 2008. Out of 1170 hospital admissions, 1163 medical records were identified and reviewed by two trained obstetricians (M.N.P. and W.M.S.). The study was approved by the
Results
Of the 1163 hospital admissions whose records were available for review, eight were effective maternal deaths, 157 cases were classified as ‘positive’ by at least one of the three diagnostic tools and 998 cases showed no severe morbidities (Fig. 1). The WHO criteria detected only 27 cases of MNM, whereas 126 and 153 cases were identified as ‘positive’ according the Waterstone and the literature-based criteria, respectively. As there were 812 live births in the hospital in the reference period
Comments
As pointed out in several studies [11], [24], [25], using different diagnostic criteria may lead to an important heterogeneity in MNM estimates. For instance, current findings show that the Waterstone [20] and the literature-based [21] approaches tend to detect 4–6 times more cases than the WHO criteria [5]. This inconsistency clearly reiterates that comparison of studies employing different approaches should be avoided.
In effect, this distinction has been mentioned in a recent official WHO
Authorship
All authors have fulfilled condition required for authorship.
Conflict of interests
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Acknowledgments
The authors would also like to thank the staff of Pedro Ernesto University Hospital, who are willing to help data collection and made this research possible. The author MER was partially supported by the Brazilian National Research Council (CNPQ), processes no. 306909/2006-5 and 301221/2009-0.
References (28)
- et al.
Maternal health in poor countries: the broader context and a call for action
Lancet
(2006) - et al.
Maternal near miss – towards a standard tool for monitoring quality of maternal health care
Best Practice and Research. Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology
(2009) - et al.
Identifying barriers from home to the appropriate hospital through near-miss audits in developing countries
Best Practice and Research. Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology
(2009) - et al.
Severe maternal morbidity due to abortion prospectively identified in a surveillance network in Brazil
International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics
(2012) - et al.
Maternal near-miss in a rural hospital in Sudan
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
(2011) - et al.
Maternal morbidity and near-miss mortality among women referred for emergency obstetric care in rural Uganda
International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics
(2011) - World Health Organization. World health statistics 2011. Available from:...
- United Nations. The Millennium Development Goals Report. New York,...
- et al.
Near miss audit in obstetrics
Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology
(2007) - et al.
Obstetric audit in resource poor settings: lessons from a multi-country project auditing ‘near-miss’ obstetrical emergencies
Health Policy and Planning
(2004)
The active components of effective training in obstetric emergencies
BJOG
Severe obstetric maternal morbidity: a 15-year population-based study
Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Severe maternal morbidity in Canada, 1991–2001
Canadian Medical Association Journal
Systematic review of near miss maternal morbidity
Cadernos de Saude Publica
Cited by (17)
The effects of previous cesarean deliveries on severe maternal and adverse perinatal outcomes at a university hospital in Tanzania
2016, International Journal of Gynecology and ObstetricsCitation Excerpt :The present study had several strengths. WHO criteria allowed the identification of patients with signs and symptoms of organ dysfunction, and have higher specificity for identifying life-threatening conditions than other criteria [23]. Data collection was performed in a structured and consistent manner and having all medical records reviewed by the same researcher prevented different interpretations of MNM criteria and causes of SMO.
Life-threatening Complications in Pregnancy in a Teaching Hospital in Kolkata, India
2019, Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of IndiaTemporal trends of maternal near miss in brazil between 2000 and 2012
2019, Revista Brasileira de Saude Materno InfantilConcepts, prevalence and characteristics of severe maternal morbidity and near miss in Brazil: A systematic review
2018, Revista Brasileira de Saude Materno Infantil