Search

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]

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]

Objective: To develop a chart for risk of small-for-gestational-age (SGA) at birth depending on deviations in symphysis-fundus (SF) height values for gestational age during pregnancy weeks 24-42.Design: Registry-based population cohort study.Setting: Antenatal clinics, Västra Götaland County, Sweden, 2005-2010.Population: The study included 42 018 women with ultrasound-dated singleton pregnancies who delivered at Sahlgrenska University Hospital. Data (including 282 713 SF height measurements) were extracted from the hospital's computerised obstetric database.Methods: Linear and binary regression analyses were used to derive prediction models with deviations in birthweight (BW) and SF height by gestational age as dependent and independent variables, respectively. Receiver operating characteristic curves were generated to evaluate the predictive value of the model in detecting SGA.Main Outcome Measures: Birthweight and small-for-gestational-age.Results: Symphysis-fundus height accounted for 3% of individual BW variance at 24 weeks, increasing gradually to 20% at 40 weeks. Maternal factors explained an additional 10 percentage points of BW variance. Receiver operating characteristic curves confirmed that SF height was a stronger SGA predictor in late than in early pregnancy. Using an SGA relative risk cut-off limit of ≥2-fold, the overall sensitivity was 50% and the overall specificity 80%. Only the most recent SF measurement was useful in predicting BW deviation; previous measurements added nothing to the predictive value.Conclusions: The ability of SF measurements to detect SGA status at birth increases with gestational age. Only the most recent SF measurement has predictive value; a static or falling pattern of SF values did not increase SGA likelihood.Tweetable Abstract: New SF curves predict SGA best in late pregnancy; only the most recent SF measurement has predictive value. [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]

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., (© 2017 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.)

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., (© 2016 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists The World Health Organization retains copyright and all other rights in the manuscript of this article as submitted for publication.)

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., (© 2016 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists The World Health Organization retains copyright and all other rights in the manuscript of this article as submitted for publication.)

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., (© 2016 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists The World Health Organization retains copyright and all other rights in the manuscript of this article as submitted for publication.)

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., (© 2015 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.)

Background: Fetal movement counting may improve timely identification of decreased fetal activity and thereby contribute to prevent adverse pregnancy outcomes, but it may also contribute to maternal concern. This study aimed to test whether fetal movement counting increased maternal concern., Methods: In a multicenter, controlled trial 1,013 women with a singleton pregnancy were randomly assigned either to perform daily fetal movement counting from pregnancy week 28 or to follow standard Norwegian antenatal care where fetal movement counting is not encouraged. The primary outcome was maternal concern, measured by the Cambridge Worry Scale. Analysis was by intention-to-treat., Results: The means and SDs on Cambridge Worry Scale scores were 0.77 (0.55) and 0.90 (0.62) for the intervention and the control groups, respectively, a mean difference between the groups of 0.14 (95% CI: 0.06-0.21, p<0.001). Decreased fetal activity was of concern to 433 women once or more during pregnancy, 45 and 42 percent in the intervention and control groups, respectively (relative risk=1.1, 95% CI: 0.9-1.2). Seventy-nine percent of the women responded favorably to the use of counting charts., Conclusions: Women who performed fetal movement counting in the third trimester reported less concern than those in the control group. The frequency of maternal report of concern about decreased fetal activity was similar between the groups. Most women considered the use of a counting chart to be positive., (© 2012, Copyright the Authors. Journal compilation © 2012, Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background:   Women presenting with decreased fetal movement have an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Fetal movement counting may be associated with improvement in maternal-fetal attachment, which in turn, improves pregnancy outcome and postnatal mother-infant attachment. The study aim was to test whether maternal-fetal attachment differed between groups of mothers who systematically performed fetal movement counting and mothers who followed standard antenatal care where routine fetal movement counting was discouraged., Methods:   In a multicenter, randomized trial, 1,123 women were assigned to either systematic fetal movement counting from pregnancy week 28 or to standard antenatal care. This study sample included primarily white, cohabiting, nonsmoking, and relatively well-educated women. The outcome measure was maternal-fetal attachment, measured by using the Prenatal Attachment Inventory. Analysis was by intention-to-treat., Results:   No difference was found between the groups in the scores on prenatal attachment; the means and standard deviations were 59.54 (9.39) and 59.34 (9.75) [corrected] for the intervention and the control groups, respectively (p = 0.747). The mean difference between the groups was 0.20 (95% CI: -1.02-1.42) [corrected]., Conclusions:   Fetal movement counting in the third trimester does not stimulate antenatal maternal-fetal attachment. This result differs from a previous study where fetal movement counting improved maternal-fetal attachment. Further research with a focus on possible mediating factors such as levels of stress, concern, and other psychological factors is required., (© 2011, Copyright the Authors. Journal compilation © 2011, Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Objective: We aimed to describe patterns of maternally perceived fetal movement (FM) counts in normal third-trimester pregnancies and present associations between published limits of decreased fetal movement (DFM) and FM patterns in the total population., Design: Prospective cohort study., Setting: Norway, in 2005-2007 and 2007-2009., Population: The total population of women with singleton pregnancies., Methods: Using a 'count-to-ten' approach, women counted FMs daily from pregnancy week 28 until delivery. Data on maternal characteristics and birth outcomes were obtained from the Medical Birth Registry of Norway and hospital records. We measured the observed mean counting time and used chi-square and Mann-Whitney U-tests to examine differences between normal pregnancies and pregnancies with suboptimal outcomes., Main Outcome Measures: Fetal movements in normal pregnancies and in pregnancies ending in a small-for-gestational-age baby, preterm birth or non-elective caesarean section., Results: A total of 1786 women were included. The mean time to perceive ten movements was approximately 10 minutes in normal pregnancies, with a <2-minute increase in the mean towards term. Fixed limits for DFMs had low predictive values. Overall, the mean counting time in pregnancies with suboptimal outcomes did not differ markedly from normal pregnancies., Conclusions: This study does not support the notion that FM counts decrease at term in normal pregnancies. A standard approach to FM counting, applying the currently best-founded definition of DFM, was not useful as a screening tool for at-risk pregnancies in this population. Further research is needed to improve measurements of DFM., (© 2011 The Authors BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology © 2011 RCOG.)