Is telephone follow-up reliable in maternal and neonatal outcomes surveys in in vitro fertilization?

Ling Sun, Jian Xu, Pei-Ling Liang, Chun-Lin Liu
{"title":"Is telephone follow-up reliable in maternal and neonatal outcomes surveys in in vitro fertilization?","authors":"Ling Sun,&nbsp;Jian Xu,&nbsp;Pei-Ling Liang,&nbsp;Chun-Lin Liu","doi":"10.1186/s12958-022-01001-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong> Many studies that collect maternal and neonatal outcomes rely on patient self-report phone calls. It is unclear how reliable or accurate these phone call reports are.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the reliability of telephone calls in information collection in IVF.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>The women were interviewed seven days after delivery by a nurse via telephone. The maternal and neonatal outcomes were recorded based on a self-report from one of the spouses. Meanwhile, the standardized electronic hospitalized discharge records were extracted from the hospital medical database. For each case, maternal and neonatal information obtained from telephone interviews and extracted from medical files were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Agreement was classified as \"almost perfect, K = 0.81-1.00\" for preterm birth, cesarean delivery, low birth weight baby, and macrosomia. The strength of agreement was classified as \"moderate, K = 0.41-0.60\" for some antepartum complications: gestational diabetes (K = 0.569); pregnancy-induced hypertension (K = 0.588); intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (K = 0.597) and oligohydramnios (K = 0.432). The strength of agreement between telephone interviews and hospitalized discharge records can be classified as \"slight (K = 0-0.20)\" for some complications: thyroid diseases (K = 0.137), anemia (K = 0.047), postpartum hemorrhage (K = 0.016), and Fetal distress (K = 0.106).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Some variables (preterm birth, cesarean delivery, birth weight) information collected by telephone follow-up were reliable. However, other complications (thyroid diseases, anemia, postpartum hemorrhage, and fetal distress) collected via self-report was non-reliable. Compared with complications during labor, antepartum complications have higher agreement between different follow-up methods. IVF records and hospitalized discharge records should be matched and collected simultaneously when discussing maternal and neonatal outcomes of IVF.</p>","PeriodicalId":520764,"journal":{"name":"Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E","volume":" ","pages":"128"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9396850/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-022-01001-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background:  Many studies that collect maternal and neonatal outcomes rely on patient self-report phone calls. It is unclear how reliable or accurate these phone call reports are.

Objective: To evaluate the reliability of telephone calls in information collection in IVF.

Study design: The women were interviewed seven days after delivery by a nurse via telephone. The maternal and neonatal outcomes were recorded based on a self-report from one of the spouses. Meanwhile, the standardized electronic hospitalized discharge records were extracted from the hospital medical database. For each case, maternal and neonatal information obtained from telephone interviews and extracted from medical files were compared.

Results: Agreement was classified as "almost perfect, K = 0.81-1.00" for preterm birth, cesarean delivery, low birth weight baby, and macrosomia. The strength of agreement was classified as "moderate, K = 0.41-0.60" for some antepartum complications: gestational diabetes (K = 0.569); pregnancy-induced hypertension (K = 0.588); intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (K = 0.597) and oligohydramnios (K = 0.432). The strength of agreement between telephone interviews and hospitalized discharge records can be classified as "slight (K = 0-0.20)" for some complications: thyroid diseases (K = 0.137), anemia (K = 0.047), postpartum hemorrhage (K = 0.016), and Fetal distress (K = 0.106).

Conclusion: Some variables (preterm birth, cesarean delivery, birth weight) information collected by telephone follow-up were reliable. However, other complications (thyroid diseases, anemia, postpartum hemorrhage, and fetal distress) collected via self-report was non-reliable. Compared with complications during labor, antepartum complications have higher agreement between different follow-up methods. IVF records and hospitalized discharge records should be matched and collected simultaneously when discussing maternal and neonatal outcomes of IVF.

Abstract Image

电话随访在体外受精的产妇和新生儿结局调查中可靠吗?
背景:许多收集孕产妇和新生儿结局的研究依赖于患者自我报告的电话。目前尚不清楚这些电话报告的可靠性和准确性。目的:评价试管婴儿信息收集中电话的可靠性。研究设计:这些妇女在分娩后7天由一名护士通过电话采访。根据配偶一方的自我报告记录产妇和新生儿的结局。同时,从医院医疗数据库中提取标准化的电子出院记录。对于每个病例,从电话访谈中获得的孕产妇和新生儿信息与从医疗档案中提取的信息进行比较。结果:早产、剖宫产、低出生体重儿、巨大儿的一致性为“几乎完全,K = 0.81-1.00”。一些产前并发症的一致性强度为“中等,K = 0.41-0.60”:妊娠期糖尿病(K = 0.569);妊娠高血压(K = 0.588);妊娠期肝内胆汁淤积(K = 0.597)和羊水过少(K = 0.432)。电话访谈与出院记录的吻合程度为“轻微(K = 0-0.20)”,其中甲状腺疾病(K = 0.137)、贫血(K = 0.047)、产后出血(K = 0.016)、胎儿窘迫(K = 0.106)。结论:电话随访收集到的一些变量(早产、剖宫产、出生体重)信息是可靠的。然而,其他并发症(甲状腺疾病、贫血、产后出血和胎儿窘迫)通过自我报告收集是不可靠的。与产程并发症相比,产前并发症在不同随访方式间具有较高的一致性。在讨论IVF的母婴结局时,应将IVF记录与住院出院记录相匹配并同时收集。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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