Risk stratification during antenatal care failed to identify most mothers who experienced adverse pregnancy outcomes: A prospective study from Kakamega County, Kenya.

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Jan E Cooper, Margaret Kruk, David Kapaon, Kennedy Opondo, Jacinta Nzinga, Rose J Kosgei, Kevin Croke
{"title":"Risk stratification during antenatal care failed to identify most mothers who experienced adverse pregnancy outcomes: A prospective study from Kakamega County, Kenya.","authors":"Jan E Cooper, Margaret Kruk, David Kapaon, Kennedy Opondo, Jacinta Nzinga, Rose J Kosgei, Kevin Croke","doi":"10.1111/tmi.14110","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Risk stratification of pregnancies informs clinical care globally. Yet recent research has cast doubt on the ability of currently used population-level risk measures to accurately predict poor outcomes at the individual level. We examine the assumption that existing forms of risk stratification can successfully identify women likely to develop complications during delivery in a rural setting in Kenya.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a prospective observational study of 19,653 pregnant women in Kakamega County in Western Kenya. Women were contacted three times during the perinatal period and surveyed about provider-identified risks and self-assessed concerns about pregnancy complications, delivery process outcomes, and adverse delivery outcomes. Measures of risk were derived from women's self-reporting. We compared delivery process outcomes and adverse delivery outcomes between high- and low-risk pregnancies, and between women with and without expressed concerns about delivery complications. Delivery process outcomes included intrapartum referral, unplanned caesarean section, blood transfusion, hysterectomy, or admission to an intensive care unit. Adverse delivery outcomes included stillbirth, neonatal mortality, and maternal mortality. We reported means and confidence intervals for each category, and tested for differences using bivariate linear regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-eight percent of pregnancies had at least one risk factor consistent with a high risk pregnancy; the remaining 62% were low risk by this criteria. Rates of most adverse process outcomes and delivery outcomes were higher among pregnancies with known risks. However, 64.5% of maternal deaths and 54.8% of all deaths in the sample took place among pregnancies characterised as low risk.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Risk stratification using existing indicators of risk during pregnancy is inadequate to identify women at risk of adverse health outcomes in this setting.</p>","PeriodicalId":23962,"journal":{"name":"Tropical Medicine & International Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tropical Medicine & International Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/tmi.14110","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Risk stratification of pregnancies informs clinical care globally. Yet recent research has cast doubt on the ability of currently used population-level risk measures to accurately predict poor outcomes at the individual level. We examine the assumption that existing forms of risk stratification can successfully identify women likely to develop complications during delivery in a rural setting in Kenya.

Methods: We conducted a prospective observational study of 19,653 pregnant women in Kakamega County in Western Kenya. Women were contacted three times during the perinatal period and surveyed about provider-identified risks and self-assessed concerns about pregnancy complications, delivery process outcomes, and adverse delivery outcomes. Measures of risk were derived from women's self-reporting. We compared delivery process outcomes and adverse delivery outcomes between high- and low-risk pregnancies, and between women with and without expressed concerns about delivery complications. Delivery process outcomes included intrapartum referral, unplanned caesarean section, blood transfusion, hysterectomy, or admission to an intensive care unit. Adverse delivery outcomes included stillbirth, neonatal mortality, and maternal mortality. We reported means and confidence intervals for each category, and tested for differences using bivariate linear regression.

Results: Thirty-eight percent of pregnancies had at least one risk factor consistent with a high risk pregnancy; the remaining 62% were low risk by this criteria. Rates of most adverse process outcomes and delivery outcomes were higher among pregnancies with known risks. However, 64.5% of maternal deaths and 54.8% of all deaths in the sample took place among pregnancies characterised as low risk.

Conclusions: Risk stratification using existing indicators of risk during pregnancy is inadequate to identify women at risk of adverse health outcomes in this setting.

产前保健期间的风险分层未能确定大多数经历不良妊娠结局的母亲:一项来自肯尼亚卡卡梅加县的前瞻性研究。
导言:妊娠风险分层为全球临床护理提供了依据。然而,最近的研究却对目前使用的人群风险测量方法能否准确预测个体的不良预后产生了怀疑。我们研究了现有的风险分层形式能否成功识别肯尼亚农村地区分娩过程中可能出现并发症的产妇:我们对肯尼亚西部卡卡梅加县的 19653 名孕妇进行了前瞻性观察研究。在围产期,我们与孕妇联系了三次,并调查了由医疗服务提供者确定的风险以及孕妇对妊娠并发症、分娩过程结果和不良分娩结果的自我评估。风险度量来自产妇的自我报告。我们比较了高危妊娠和低危妊娠的分娩过程结局和不良分娩结局,以及对分娩并发症表示担忧和未表示担忧的产妇的分娩过程结局和不良分娩结局。分娩过程结果包括产前转诊、意外剖腹产、输血、子宫切除术或入住重症监护室。不良分娩结局包括死胎、新生儿死亡和产妇死亡。我们报告了每个类别的平均值和置信区间,并使用双变量线性回归对差异进行了检验:结果:38%的孕妇至少有一个风险因素符合高危妊娠的标准,其余62%的孕妇符合低危妊娠的标准。在已知风险的孕妇中,大多数不良过程结果和分娩结果的发生率较高。然而,样本中64.5%的孕产妇死亡和54.8%的死亡发生在低风险妊娠中:结论:使用现有的孕期风险指标进行风险分层不足以识别在这种情况下有不良健康后果风险的妇女。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Tropical Medicine & International Health
Tropical Medicine & International Health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
129
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Tropical Medicine & International Health is published on behalf of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Foundation Tropical Medicine and International Health, Belgian Institute of Tropical Medicine and Bernhard-Nocht-Institute for Tropical Medicine. Tropical Medicine & International Health is the official journal of the Federation of European Societies for Tropical Medicine and International Health (FESTMIH).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信