BackgroundMaternal morbidity is a complex entity and its presentation and severity are on a spectrum. This paper describes the conceptualization and development of a definition for maternal morbidity, and the framework for its measurement: the maternal morbidity matrix, which is the foundation for measuring maternal morbidity, thus, the assessment tool.DiscussionWe define maternal morbidity and associated disability as “any health condition attributed to and/or complicating pregnancy and childbirth that has a negative impact on the woman’s wellbeing and/or functioning.” A matrix of 121 conditions was generated through expert meetings, review of the International Classification of Diseases and related health problems (ICD-10), literature reviews, applying the definition of maternal morbidity and a cut-off of >0.1 % prevalence. This matrix has three dimensions: identified morbidity category, reported functioning impact and maternal history. The identification criteria for morbidity include 58 symptoms, 29 signs, 44 investigations and 35 management strategies; these criteria are aimed at recognizing the medical condition, or the functional impact/disability component that will capture the negative impact experienced by the woman.SummaryThe maternal morbidity matrix is a practical framework for assessing maternal morbidity beyond near-miss. In light of the emerging attention to Universal Health Coverage (UHC) as part of the post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) planning, a definition and standard identification criteria are essential to measuring its extent and impact.

BackgroundMental health is a significant contributor to global burden of disease and the consequences of perinatal psychiatric morbidity can be substantial. We aimed to obtain global estimates of puerperal psychosis prevalence based on population-based samples and to understand how postpartum psychosis is assessed and captured among included studies.MethodsIn June 2014, we searched PubMed, CiNAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Sociological Collections, and Global Index Medicus for publications since the year 1990. Criteria for inclusion in the systematic review were: use of primary data relevant to pre-defined mental health conditions, specified dates of data collection, limited to data from 1990 onwards, sample size >200 and a clear description of methodology. Data were extracted from published peer reviewed articles.ResultsThe search yielded 24,273 publications, of which six studies met the criteria. Five studies reported incidence of puerperal psychosis (ranging from 0.89 to 2.6 in 1000 women) and one reported prevalence of psychosis (5 in 1000). Due to the heterogeneity of methodologies used across studies in definitions and assessments used to identify cases, data was not pooled to calculate a global estimate of risk.ConclusionsThis review confirms the relatively low rate of puerperal psychosis; yet given the potential for serious consequences, this morbidity is significant from a global public health perspective. Further attention to consistent detection of puerperal psychosis can help provide appropriate treatment to prevent harmful consequences for both mother and baby.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12888-017-1427-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

ObjectiveTo field test a standardized instrument to measure nonsevere morbidity among antenatal and postpartum women.MethodsA cross‐sectional study was conducted in Jamaica, Kenya, and Malawi (2015–2016). Women presenting for antenatal care (ANC) or postpartum care (PPC) were recruited if they were at least 28 weeks into pregnancy or 6 weeks after delivery. They were interviewed and examined by a doctor, midwife, or nurse. Data were collected and securely stored electronically on a WHO server. Diagnosed conditions were coded and summarized using ICD‐MM.ResultsA total of 1490 women (750 ANC; 740 PPC) averaging 26 years of age participated. Most women (61.6% ANC, 79.1% PPC) were healthy (no diagnosed medical or obstetric conditions). Among ANC women with clinical diagnoses, 18.3% had direct (obstetric) conditions and 18.0% indirect (medical) problems. Prevalences among PPC women were lower (12.7% and 8.6%, respectively). When screening for factors in the expanded morbidity definition, 12.8% (ANC) and 11.0% (PPC) self‐reported exposure to violence.ConclusionNonsevere conditions are distinct from the leading causes of maternal death and may vary across pregnancy and the puerperium. This effort to identify and measure nonsevere morbidity promotes a comprehensive understanding of morbidity, incorporating maternal self‐reporting of exposure to violence, and mental health. Further validation is needed.

BackgroundWhile it is estimated that for every maternal death, 20–30 women suffer morbidity, these estimates are not based on standardized methods and measures. Lack of an agreed-upon definition, identification criteria, standardized assessment tools, and indicators has limited valid, routine, and comparable measurements of maternal morbidity. The World Health Organization (WHO) convened the Maternal Morbidity Working Group (MMWG) to develop standardized methods to improve estimates of maternal morbidity. To date, the MMWG has developed a definition and provided input into the development of a set of measurement tools. This protocol outlines the pilot test for measuring maternal morbidity in antenatal and postnatal clinical populations using these new tools.MethodsIn each setting, the tools will be piloted on approximately 250 women receiving antenatal care (ANC) (at least 28 weeks pregnant) and 250 women receiving postpartum care (PPC) (at least 6 weeks postpartum). The tools will be administered by trained health care workers. Each tool has three modules as follows:personal history – socio-economic information, and risk-factors (such as violence and substance abuse)patient symptoms – WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 12-item, and mental health questionnaires, General Anxiety Disorder, 7-item (GAD-7) and Personal Health Questionnaire, 9-item (PHQ-9)physical examination – signs, laboratory tests and results.DiscussionThis pilot (planned for Jamaica, Kenya and Malawi) will allow for comparing the types of morbidities women experience between and across settings, and determine the feasibility, acceptability and utility of using a modified, streamlined tool for routine measurement and summary estimates of morbidity to inform resource allocation and service provision. As part of the post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) estimating and measuring maternal morbidity will be essential to ensure appropriate resources are allocated to address its impact and improve well-being.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12978-016-0164-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundGlobally, there is greater awareness of the plight of women who have complications associated with pregnancy or childbirth and who may continue to experience long‐term problems. In addition, the health of women and their ability to perform economic and social functions are central to the Sustainable Development Goals.MethodsIn 2012, WHO began an initiative to standardize the definition, conceptualization, and assessment of maternal morbidity. The culmination of this work was a conceptual framework: the Maternal Morbidity Measurement (MMM) Framework.ResultsThe framework underscores the broad ramifications of maternal morbidity and highlights what types of measurement are needed to capture what matters to women, service providers, and policy makers. Using examples from the literature, we explain the framework's principles and its most important elements.ConclusionsWe express the need for comprehensive research and detailed longitudinal studies of women from early pregnancy to the extended postpartum period to understand how health and symptoms and signs of ill health change. With respect to interventions, there may be gaps in healthcare provision for women with chronic conditions and who are about to conceive. Women also require continuity of care at the primary care level beyond the customary 6 weeks postpartum.

The maternal health agenda is undergoing a paradigm shift from preventing maternal deaths to promoting women's health and wellness. A critical focus of this trajectory includes addressing maternal morbidity and the increasing burden of chronic and noncommunicable diseases (NCD) among pregnant women. The WHO convened the Maternal Morbidity Working Group (MMWG) to improve the scientific basis for defining, measuring, and monitoring maternal morbidity. Based on the MMWG's work, we propose paradigms for conceptualizing maternal health and related interventions, and call for greater integration between maternal health and NCD programs. This integration can be synergistic, given the links between chronic conditions, morbidity in pregnancy, and long‐term health. Pregnancy should be viewed as a window of opportunity into the current and future health of women, and offers critical entry points for women who may otherwise not seek or have access to care for chronic conditions. Maternal health services should move beyond the focus on emergency obstetric care, to a broader approach that encompasses preventive and early interventions, and integration with existing services. Health systems need to respond by prioritizing funding for developing integrated health programs, and workforce strengthening. The MMWG's efforts have highlighted the changing landscape of maternal health, and the need to expand the narrow focus of maternal health, moving beyond surviving to thriving.

for sharing insights that informed the vision; and Brooke Partridge, Liz Grubin, Tamsyn Seimon, and Julie Pohlig for input on communicating the vision.

BackgroundInfection is an important, preventable cause of maternal morbidity, and pregnancy-related sepsis accounts for 11% of maternal deaths. However, frequency of maternal infection is poorly described, and, to our knowledge, it remains the one major cause of maternal mortality without a systematic review of incidence. Our objective was to estimate the average global incidence of maternal peripartum infection.Methods and findingsWe searched Medline, EMBASE, Global Health, and five other databases from January 2005 to June 2016 (PROSPERO: CRD42017074591). Specific outcomes comprised chorioamnionitis in labour, puerperal endometritis, wound infection following cesarean section or perineal trauma, and sepsis occurring from onset of labour until 42 days postpartum. We assessed studies irrespective of language or study design. We excluded conference abstracts, studies of high-risk women, and data collected before 1990. Three reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data, and appraised quality. Quality criteria for incidence/prevalence studies were adapted from the Joanna Briggs Institute. We used random-effects models to obtain weighted pooled estimates of incidence risk for each outcome and metaregression to identify study-level characteristics affecting incidence. From 31,528 potentially relevant articles, we included 111 studies of infection in women in labour or postpartum from 46 countries. Four studies were randomised controlled trials, two were before–after intervention studies, and the remainder were observational cohort or cross-sectional studies. The pooled incidence in high-quality studies was 3.9% (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.8%–6.8%) for chorioamnionitis, 1.6% (95% CI 0.9%–2.5%) for endometritis, 1.2% (95% CI 1.0%–1.5%) for wound infection, 0.05% (95% CI 0.03%–0.07%) for sepsis, and 1.1% (95% CI 0.3%–2.4%) for maternal peripartum infection. 19% of studies met all quality criteria. There were few data from developing countries and marked heterogeneity in study designs and infection definitions, limiting the interpretation of these estimates as measures of global infection incidence. A limitation of this review is the inclusion of studies that were facility-based or restricted to low-risk groups of women.ConclusionsIn this study, we observed pooled infection estimates of almost 4% in labour and between 1%–2% of each infection outcome postpartum. This indicates maternal peripartum infection is an important complication of childbirth and that preventive efforts should be increased in light of antimicrobial resistance. Incidence risk appears lower than modelled global estimates, although differences in definitions limit comparability. Better-quality research, using standard definitions, is required to improve comparability between study settings and to demonstrate the influence of risk factors and protective interventions.