Search

Accurate and consistent classification of causes and associated conditions for perinatal deaths is essential to inform strategies to reduce the five million which occur globally each year. With the majority of deaths occurring in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), their needs must be prioritised. The aim of this paper is to review the classification of perinatal death, the contemporary classification systems including the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases - Perinatal Mortality (ICD-PM), and next steps. During the period from 2009 to 2014, a total of 81 new or modified classification systems were identified with the majority developed in high-income countries (HICs). Structure, definitions and rules and therefore data on causes vary widely and implementation is suboptimal. Whereas system testing is limited, none appears ideal. Several systems result in a high proportion of unexplained stillbirths, prompting HICs to use more detailed systems that require data unavailable in low-income countries. Some systems appear to perform well across these different settings. ICD-PM addresses some shortcomings of ICD-10 for perinatal deaths, but important limitations remain, especially for stillbirths. A global approach to classification is needed and seems feasible. The new ICD-PM system is an important step forward and improvements will be enhanced by wide-scale use and evaluation. Implementation requires national-level support and dedicated resources. Future research should focus on implementation strategies and evaluation methods, defining placental pathologies, and ways to engage parents in the process., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

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.)

Background: Each year, about 5.3 million babies die in the perinatal period. Understanding of causes of death is critical for prevention, yet there is no globally acceptable classification system. Instead, many disparate systems have been developed and used. We aimed to identify all systems used or created between 2009 and 2014, with their key features, including extent of alignment with the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) and variation in features by region, to inform the World Health Organization's development of a new global approach to classifying perinatal deaths., Methods: A systematic literature review (CINAHL, EMBASE, Medline, Global Health, and PubMed) identified published and unpublished studies and national reports describing new classification systems or modifications of existing systems for causes of perinatal death, or that used or tested such systems, between 2009 and 2014. Studies reporting ICD use only were excluded. Data were independently double-extracted (except from non-English publications). Subgroup analyses explored variation by extent and region., Results: Eighty-one systems were identified as new, modifications of existing systems, or having been used between 2009 and 2014, with an average of ten systems created/modified each year. Systems had widely varying characteristics: (i) comprehensiveness (40 systems classified both stillbirths and neonatal deaths); (ii) extent of use (systems were created in 28 countries and used in 40; 17 were created for national use; 27 were widely used); (iii) accessibility (three systems available in e-format); (iv) underlying cause of death (64 systems required a single cause of death); (v) reliability (10 systems tested for reliability, with overall Kappa scores ranging from .35-.93); and (vi) ICD alignment (17 systems used ICD codes). Regional databases were not searched, so system numbers may be underestimated. Some non-differential misclassification of systems was possible., Conclusions: The plethora of systems in use, and continuing system development, hamper international efforts to improve understanding of causes of death. Recognition of the features of currently used systems, combined with a better understanding of the drivers of continued system creation, may help the development of a truly effective global system.

Background: To reduce the burden of 5.3 million stillbirths and neonatal deaths annually, an understanding of causes of deaths is critical. A systematic review identified 81 systems for classification of causes of stillbirth (SB) and neonatal death (NND) between 2009 and 2014. The large number of systems hampers efforts to understand and prevent these deaths. This study aimed to assess the alignment of current classification systems with expert-identified characteristics for a globally effective classification system., Methods: Eighty-one classification systems were assessed for alignment with 17 characteristics previously identified through expert consensus as necessary for an effective global system. Data were extracted independently by two authors. Systems were assessed against each characteristic and weighted and unweighted scores assigned to each. Subgroup analyses were undertaken by system use, setting, type of death included and type of characteristic., Results: None of the 81 systems were aligned with more than 9 of the 17 characteristics; most (82 %) were aligned with four or fewer. On average, systems were aligned with 19 % of characteristics. The most aligned system (Frøen 2009-Codac) still had an unweighted score of only 9/17. Alignment with individual characteristics ranged from 0 to 49 %. Alignment was somewhat higher for widely used as compared to less used systems (22 % v 17 %), systems used only in high income countries as compared to only in low and middle income countries (20 % vs 16 %), and systems including both SB and NND (23 %) as compared to NND-only (15 %) and SB-only systems (13 %). Alignment was higher with characteristics assessing structure (23 %) than function (15 %)., Conclusions: There is an unmet need for a system exhibiting all the characteristics of a globally effective system as defined by experts in the use of systems, as none of the 81 contemporary classification systems assessed was highly aligned with these characteristics. A particular concern in terms of global effectiveness is the lack of alignment with "ease of use" among all systems, including even the most-aligned. A system which meets the needs of users would have the potential to become the first truly globally effective classification system.

Background: Despite the global burden of perinatal deaths, there is currently no single, globally-acceptable classification system for perinatal deaths. Instead, multiple, disparate systems are in use world-wide. This inconsistency hinders accurate estimates of causes of death and impedes effective prevention strategies. The World Health Organisation (WHO) is developing a globally-acceptable classification approach for perinatal deaths. To inform this work, we sought to establish a consensus on the important characteristics of such a system., Methods: A group of international experts in the classification of perinatal deaths were identified and invited to join an expert panel to develop a list of important characteristics of a quality global classification system for perinatal death. A Delphi consensus methodology was used to reach agreement. Three rounds of consultation were undertaken using a purpose built on-line survey. Round one sought suggested characteristics for subsequent scoring and selection in rounds two and three., Results: The panel of experts agreed on a total of 17 important characteristics for a globally-acceptable perinatal death classification system. Of these, 10 relate to the structural design of the system and 7 relate to the functional aspects and use of the system., Conclusion: This study serves as formative work towards the development of a globally-acceptable approach for the classification of the causes of perinatal deaths. The list of functional and structural characteristics identified should be taken into consideration when designing and developing such a system.

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]

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]