Pre-GDM and GDM continue to be associated with an increased risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes; however, women with GDM have adverse outcomes less frequently. Rates of GDM and pre-GDM appear to be increasing over time. Clinicians should consider the potential for adverse outcomes, and arrange referral to appropriate services.
ObjectiveTo assess the accuracy of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy reporting in birth and hospital discharge data compared with data abstracted from medical records.MethodsData from a validation study of 1200 women provided the ‘gold standard’ for hypertension status. The validation data were linked to both hospital discharge and birth databases. Hypertension could be reported in one, both, or neither database.ResultsOf the 1184 records available for review, 8.3% of women had pregnancy-related hypertension and 1.3% had chronic hypertension. Reporting sensitivities ranged from 23% to 99% and specificities from 96% to 100%. Using broad rather than specific categories of hypertension and more than one source to identify hypertension improved case ascertainment. Women with severe preeclampsia or adverse outcomes were more likely to have their pregnancy-related hypertension reported. When the hypertension reporting was discordant on the birth and hospital discharge data, the hospital data were more accurate.ConclusionsPregnancy-related hypertension is reported with a reasonable level of accuracy, but chronic hypertension is markedly under-ascertained, even when cases were identified from more than one source. Milder forms of hypertension are more likely to go unreported. Studies utilizing population health data may overestimate the proportion of more severe forms of disease and any risk these conditions contribute to other outcomes.
Administrative or population health data sets (PHDS), such as birth and hospital discharge data, are used increasingly to evaluate maternity care. Use of PHDS requires reliable identification of diagnoses and procedures. The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy and reliability of the reporting of diagnoses and procedures related to childbirth in both individual and linked, birth and ICD10-coded hospital discharge data. Data from a population-based validation study of 1200 women provided the 'gold standard' for labour and delivery events and were compared with the hospital discharge and birth databases. Reporting characteristics (sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values) were determined for: induction, augmentation and obstruction of labour, modes of delivery (including failed instrumental delivery), episiotomy, perineal tears and repairs, and manual removal of the placenta. Differences in reporting by mode of delivery were also examined. Of the 1184 records available for review, 25% had labour induced, 25% had labour augmented and, of those who laboured, 17% had obstructed labour reported. Fourteen per cent had an elective/planned caesarean section (CS) including 2% that went into labour prior to the planned date, and 11% had an emergency, unplanned CS including 2% who had no labour. With the exception of augmentation and obstruction of labour, failed instrumental delivery and manual removal, there were high levels of accuracy for reporting of diagnoses and procedures during labour and delivery. There were no significant differences in reporting by mode of delivery. The findings suggest that PHDS-reported induction of labour, mode of delivery, and 3rd and 4th degree tears and repairs can be reliably used to evaluate maternity care. Consistency in reporting in birth and hospital discharge data from different countries and over time suggests the findings are likely to be generalisable to high-income countries.
Background: Maternal mortality is too rare in high income countries to be used as a marker of the quality of maternity care. Consequently severe maternal morbidity has been suggested as a better indicator. Using the maternal morbidity outcome indicator (MMOI) developed and validated for use in routinely collected population health data, we aimed to determine trends in severe adverse maternal outcomes during the birth admission and in particular to examine the contribution of postpartum haemorrhage (PPH).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.