Uterotonics for prevention of postpartum haemorrhage: EN-BIRTH multi-country validation study

Effect of Carbetocin on Postpartum Hemorrhage after Vaginal Delivery: A Meta-Analysis

Background

The efficacy of oxytocin and carbetocin in preventing postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) in women with vaginal delivery has been controversial. This study is aimed at conducting a meta-analysis that compares the efficacy of carbetocin and oxytocin in the prevention of PPH among women with vaginal delivery.

Methods

Literature was retrieved from PubMed, Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and CNKI databases. The randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compare the efficacy of carbetocin and oxytocin to prevent PPH were searched. Data from the included literatures were extracted by two researchers, including author, title, publication date, study type, study number, the incidence of PPH, number of patients requiring additional uterotonics, and number of patients requiring blood transfusion. Jadad scale was used to evaluate the quality of the included RCTs. The Chi-square test was adopted for the heterogeneity test. A fixed-effect model was used for analysis if heterogeneity did not exist between literatures. If heterogeneity exists between literatures, a random-effect model was used for analysis. The source of heterogeneity was explored by subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis.

Results

The incidence of PPH in the carbetocin group was lower than that in the oxytocin group (OR = 0.62, 95% CI (0.46, 0.84), Z = 3.14, P = 0.002). There was no heterogeneity among studies (χ² = 7.29, P = 0.12, I² = 45%) and no significant publication bias (P > 0.05). The proportion of women requiring additional uterotonics in the carbetocin group was lower than that in the oxytocin group (OR = 0.41, 95% CI (0.29, 0.56), Z = 5.34, P < 0.00001). There was no heterogeneity among studies (χ² = 0.82, P = 0.84, I² = 0%) and no significant publication bias (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the proportion of women needing blood transfusion between the carbetocin group and the oxytocin group (OR = 0.92, 95% CI (0.66, 1.29), Z = 0.46, P = 0.64). There was no heterogeneity among studies (χ² = 3.06, P = 0.55, I² = 0%) and no significant publication bias (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

Carbetocin is superior to oxytocin in preventing PPH among women with vaginal delivery and can be widely used in clinical practice.

Survey of women's report for 33 maternal and newborn indicators: EN-BIRTH multi-country validation study

BACKGROUND

Population-based household surveys, notably the Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS), remain the main source of maternal and newborn health data for many low- and middle-income countries. As part of the Every Newborn Birth Indicators Research Tracking in Hospitals (EN-BIRTH) study, this paper focuses on testing validity of measurement of maternal and newborn indicators around the time of birth (intrapartum and postnatal) in survey-report.

METHODS

EN-BIRTH was an observational study testing the validity of measurement for selected maternal and newborn indicators in five secondary/tertiary hospitals in Bangladesh, Nepal and Tanzania, conducted from July 2017 to July 2018. We compared women's report at exit survey with the gold standard of direct observation or verification from clinical records for women with vaginal births. Population-level validity was assessed by validity ratios (survey-reported coverage: observer-assessed coverage). Individual-level accuracy was assessed by sensitivity, specificity and percent agreement. We tested indicators already in DHS/MICS as well as indicators with potential to be included in population-based surveys, notably the first validation for small and sick newborn care indicators.

RESULTS

33 maternal and newborn indicators were evaluated. Amongst nine indicators already present in DHS/MICS, validity ratios for baby dried or wiped, birthweight measured, low birthweight, and sex of baby (female) were between 0.90-1.10. Instrumental birth, skin-to-skin contact, and early initiation of breastfeeding were highly overestimated by survey-report (2.04-4.83) while umbilical cord care indicators were massively underestimated (0.14-0.22). Amongst 24 indicators not currently in DHS/MICS, two newborn contact indicators (kangaroo mother care 1.00, admission to neonatal unit 1.01) had high survey-reported coverage amongst admitted newborns and high sensitivity. The remaining indicators did not perform well and some had very high "don't know" responses.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study revealed low validity for collecting many maternal and newborn indicators through an exit survey instrument, even with short recall periods among women with vaginal births. Household surveys are already at risk of overload, and some specific clinical care indicators do not perform well and may be under-powered. Given that approximately 80% of births worldwide occur in facilities, routine registers should also be explored to track coverage of key maternal and newborn health interventions, particularly for clinical care.

Barriers and enablers to routine register data collection for newborns and mothers: EN-BIRTH multi-country validation study

BACKGROUND

Policymakers need regular high-quality coverage data on care around the time of birth to accelerate progress for ending preventable maternal and newborn deaths and stillbirths. With increasing facility births, routine Health Management Information System (HMIS) data have potential to track coverage. Identifying barriers and enablers faced by frontline health workers recording HMIS source data in registers is important to improve data for use.

METHODS

The EN-BIRTH study was a mixed-methods observational study in five hospitals in Bangladesh, Nepal and Tanzania to assess measurement validity for selected Every Newborn coverage indicators. We described data elements required in labour ward registers to track these indicators. To evaluate barriers and enablers for correct recording of data in registers, we designed three interview tools: a) semi-structured in-depth interview (IDI) guide b) semi-structured focus group discussion (FGD) guide, and c) checklist assessing care-to-documentation. We interviewed two groups of respondents (January 2018-March 2019): hospital nurse-midwives and doctors who fill ward registers after birth (n = 40 IDI and n = 5 FGD); and data collectors (n = 65). Qualitative data were analysed thematically by categorising pre-identified codes. Common emerging themes of barriers or enablers across all five hospitals were identified relating to three conceptual framework categories.

RESULTS

Similar themes emerged as both barriers and enablers. First, register design was recognised as crucial, yet perceived as complex, and not always standardised for necessary data elements. Second, register filling was performed by over-stretched nurse-midwives with variable training, limited supervision, and availability of logistical resources. Documentation complexity across parallel documents was time-consuming and delayed because of low staff numbers. Complete data were valued more than correct data. Third, use of register data included clinical handover and monthly reporting, but little feedback was given from data users.

CONCLUSION

Health workers invest major time recording register data for maternal and newborn core health indicators. Improving data quality requires standardised register designs streamlined to capture only necessary data elements. Consistent implementation processes are also needed. Two-way feedback between HMIS levels is critical to improve performance and accurately track progress towards agreed health goals.

Respectful maternal and newborn care: measurement in one EN-BIRTH study hospital in Nepal

BACKGROUND

Respectful maternal and newborn care (RMNC) is an important component of high-quality care but progress is impeded by critical measurement gaps for women and newborns. The Every Newborn Birth Indicators Research Tracking in Hospitals (EN-BIRTH) study was an observational study with mixed methods assessing measurement validity for coverage and quality of maternal and newborn indicators. This paper reports results regarding the measurement of respectful care for women and newborns.

METHODS

At one EN-BIRTH study site in Pokhara, Nepal, we included additional questions during exit-survey interviews with women about their experiences (July 2017-July 2018). The questionnaire was based on seven mistreatment typologies: Physical; Sexual; or Verbal abuse; Stigma/discrimination; Failure to meet professional standards of care; Poor rapport between women and providers; and Health care denied due to inability to pay. We calculated associations between these typologies and potential determinants of health - ethnicity, age, sex, mode of birth - as possible predictors for reporting poor care.

RESULTS

Among 4296 women interviewed, none reported physical, sexual, or verbal abuse. 15.7% of women were dissatisfied with privacy, and 13.0% of women reported their birth experience did not meet their religious and cultural needs. In descriptive analysis, adjusted odds ratios and multivariate analysis showed primiparous women were less likely to report respectful care (β = 0.23, p-value < 0.0001). Women from Madeshi (a disadvantaged ethnic group) were more likely to report poor care (β = - 0.34; p-value 0.037) than women identifying as Chettri/Brahmin. Women who had caesarean section were less likely to report poor care during childbirth (β = - 0.42; p-value < 0.0001) than women with a vaginal birth. However, babies born by caesarean had a 98% decrease in the odds (aOR = 0.02, 95% CI, 0.01-0.05) of receiving skin-to-skin contact than those with vaginal births.

CONCLUSIONS

Measurement of respectful care at exit interview after hospital birth is challenging, and women generally reported 100% respectful care for themselves and their baby. Specific questions, with stratification by mode of birth, women's age and ethnicity, are important to identify those mistreated during care and to prioritise action. More research is needed to develop evidence-based measures to track experience of care, including zero separation for the mother-newborn pair, and to improve monitoring.