Estimating baseline rates of adverse perinatal and neonatal outcomes using a facility-based surveillance approach: A prospective observational study from the WHO Global Vaccine Safety Multi-Country Collaboration on safety in pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Most perinatal and neonatal deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), yet, quality data on burden of adverse outcomes of pregnancy is limited in such countries.

METHODS

A network of 21 maternity units, across seven countries, undertook surveillance for low birthweight, preterm birth, small for gestational age (SGA), stillbirths, congenital microcephaly, in-hospital neonatal deaths, and neonatal infections in a cohort of over 85,000 births from May 2019 - August 2020. For each outcome, site-specific rates per 1,000 livebirths (or per 1,000 total births for stillbirth) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Descriptive sensitivity analysis was conducted to gain insight regarding underreporting of four outcomes at 16 sites.

FINDINGS

Estimated rates varied across countries and sites, ranging between 43·3-329·5 and 21·4-276·6/1000 livebirths for low birthweight and preterm birth respectively and 11·8-81/1,000 livebirths for SGA. No cases of congenital microcephaly were reported by three sites while the highest estimated rate was 13/1,000 livebirths. Neonatal infection and neonatal death rates varied between 1·8-73 and 0-59·9/1000 livebirths respectively while stillbirth rates ranged between 0-57·1/1000 total births across study sites. Results from the sensitivity analysis confirmed the underreporting of congenital microcephaly and SGA in our study.

INTERPRETATION

Our study establishes site-specific baseline rates for important adverse perinatal and neonatal outcomes and addresses a critical evidence gap towards improved monitoring of benefits and risks of emerging pregnancy and neonatal interventions.

FUNDING

The study was sponsored by the World Health Organization with funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Operational lessons learned in conducting an international study on pharmacovigilance in pregnancy in resource-constrained settings: The WHO Global Vaccine safety Multi-Country collaboration project

The WHO Global Vaccine Safety Multi-Country Collaboration study on safety in pregnancy aims to estimate the minimum detectable risk for selected perinatal and neonatal outcomes and assess the applicability of standardized case definitions for study outcomes and maternal immunization in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This paper documents the operational lessons learned from the study. A prospective observational study was conducted across 21 hospitals in seven countries. All births occurring at sites were screened to identify select perinatal and neonatal outcomes from May 2019 to August 2020. Up to 100 cases per outcome were recruited to assess the applicability of standardized case definitions. A multi-pronged study quality assurance plan was implemented. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on site functioning and project implementation was also assessed. Multi-layered ethics and administrative approvals, limited clinical documentation, difficulty in identifying outcomes requiring in-hospital follow-up, and poor quality internet connectivity emerged as important barriers to study implementation. Use of electronic platforms, application of a rigorous quality assurance plan with frequent interaction between the central and site teams helped improve data quality. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted data collection for up to 6 weeks in some sites. Our study succeeded in establishing an international hospital-based surveillance network for evaluating perinatal and neonatal outcomes using common study protocol and procedures in geographically diverse sites with differing levels of infrastructure, clinical and health-utilization practices. The enhanced surveillance capacity of participating sites shall help support future pharmacovigilance efforts for pregnancy interventions.

Clinical Validation of Mobile Cardiotocograph Device for Intrapartum and Antepartum Monitoring Compared to Standard Cardiotocograph: An Inter-Rater Agreement Study

Objective: Electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) using cardiotocograph (CTG) is commonly used both to assess fetal wellbeing in late antepartum and for intervention during intrapartum period. We validated the performance of indigenously developed mobile cardiotocograph (CTG) device with wireless probes compared to standard CTG device. Materials and methods: We sequentially used mobile and standard CTG devices in 495 pregnant women in labour and 359 pregnant women with gestation > 32 weeks. The CTG interpreted by two independent obstetricians in a blinded manner were compared to estimate the agreement by kappa (k) statistic. Results: High level of agreements between mobile and standard CTG devices for both intrapartum (87.9%; kappa 0.61) and antepartum monitoring (91.2%; kappa 0.60) were observed. Most of the pregnant women (80% in intrapartum and 70% in antepartum groups) and all nurses and obstetricians preferred the mobile CTG device over standard CTG device. Conclusion: The mobile CTG device can reliably be used for both intrapartum and antepartum monitoring instead of the standard CTG devices. The smaller size, portability and ability to transmit the recordings for second opinion make it suitable for use by midwives for appropriate triaging and referral. Wider availability of CTG and interpretation support at the peripheral facilities would assist identifying at-risk pregnancies and foetuses for timely referral and appropriate action to reduce perinatal deaths, stillbirths and birth asphyxi.

Clinical Validation of Mobile Cardiotocograph Device for Intrapartum and Antepartum Monitoring Compared to Standard Cardiotocograph: An Inter-Rater Agreement Study

Objective: Electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) using cardiotocograph (CTG) is commonly used both to assess fetal wellbeing in late antepartum and for intervention during intrapartum period. We validated the performance of indigenously developed mobile cardiotocograph (CTG) device with wireless probes compared to standard CTG device. Materials and methods: We sequentially used mobile and standard CTG devices in 495 pregnant women in labour and 359 pregnant women with gestation > 32 weeks. The CTG interpreted by two independent obstetricians in a blinded manner were compared to estimate the agreement by kappa (k) statistic. Results: High level of agreements between mobile and standard CTG devices for both intrapartum (87.9%; kappa 0.61) and antepartum monitoring (91.2%; kappa 0.60) were observed. Most of the pregnant women (80% in intrapartum and 70% in antepartum groups) and all nurses and obstetricians preferred the mobile CTG device over standard CTG device. Conclusion: The mobile CTG device can reliably be used for both intrapartum and antepartum monitoring instead of the standard CTG devices. The smaller size, portability and ability to transmit the recordings for second opinion make it suitable for use by midwives for appropriate triaging and referral. Wider availability of CTG and interpretation support at the peripheral facilities would assist identifying at-risk pregnancies and foetuses for timely referral and appropriate action to reduce perinatal deaths, stillbirths and birth asphyxi.