Ahmet Metin Gülmezoglu

Moving beyond essential interventions for reduction of maternal mortality (the WHO Multicountry Survey on Maternal and Newborn Health): a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND We report the main findings of the WHO Multicountry Survey on Maternal and Newborn Health (WHOMCS), which aimed to assess the burden of complications related to pregnancy, the coverage of key maternal health interventions, and use of the maternal severity index (MSI) in a global network of health facilities. METHODS In our cross-sectional study, we included women attending health facilities in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East that dealt with at least 1000 childbirths per year and had the capacity to provide caesarean section. We obtained data from analysis of hospital records for all women giving birth and all women who had a severe maternal outcome (SMO; ie, maternal death or maternal near miss). We regarded coverage of key maternal health interventions as the proportion of the target population who received an indicated intervention (eg, the proportion of women with eclampsia who received magnesium sulphate). We used areas under the receiver operator characteristic curves (AUROC) with 95% CI to externally validate a previously reported MSI as an indicator of severity. We assessed the overall performance of care (ie, the ability to produce a positive effect on health outcomes) through standardised mortality ratios. RESULTS From May 1, 2010, to Dec 31, 2011, we included 314,623 women attending 357 health facilities in 29 countries (2538 had a maternal near miss and 486 maternal deaths occurred). The mean period of data collection in each health facility was 89 days (SD 21). 23,015 (7.3%) women had potentially life-threatening disorders and 3024 (1.0%) developed an SMO. 808 (26.7%) women with an SMO had post-partum haemorrhage and 784 (25.9%) had pre-eclampsia or eclampsia. Cardiovascular, respiratory, and coagulation dysfunctions were the most frequent organ dysfunctions in women who had an SMO. Reported mortality in countries with a high or very high maternal mortality ratio was two-to-three-times higher than that expected for the assessed severity despite a high coverage of essential interventions. The MSI had good accuracy for maternal death prediction in women with markers of organ dysfunction (AUROC 0.826 [95% CI 0.802-0.851]). INTERPRETATION High coverage of essential interventions did not imply reduced maternal mortality in the health-care facilities we studied. If substantial reductions in maternal mortality are to be achieved, universal coverage of life-saving interventions need to be matched with comprehensive emergency care and overall improvements in the quality of maternal health care. The MSI could be used to assess the performance of health facilities providing care to women with complications related to pregnancy. FUNDING UNDP-UNFPA-UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP); WHO; USAID; Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan; Gynuity Health Projects.

Quality of care for pregnant women and newborns—the WHO vision

In 2015, as we review progress towards Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), despite significant progress in reduction of mortality, we still have unacceptably high numbers of maternal and newborn deaths globally. Efforts over the past decade to reduce adverse outcomes for pregnant women and newborns have been directed at increasing skilled birth attendance.1, 2 This has resulted in higher rates of births in health facilities in all regions.3 The proportion of deliveries reportedly attended by skilled health personnel in developing countries rose from 56% in 1990 to 68% in 2012.4 With increasing utilisation of health services, a higher proportion of avoidable maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity have moved to health facilities. In this context, poor quality of care (QoC) in many facilities becomes a paramount roadblock in our quest to end preventable mortality and morbidity.

WHO systematic review of maternal mortality and morbidity : the prevalence of uterine rupture

Objective  To determine the prevalence of uterine rupture worldwide.

WHO Statement on Caesarean Section Rates

In 1985 when a group of experts convened by the World Health Organization in Fortaleza, Brazil, met to discuss the appropriate technology for birth, they echoed what at that moment was considered an unjustified and remarkable increase of caesarean section (CS) rates worldwide.1 Based on the evidence available at that time, the experts in Fortaleza concluded: ‘there is no justification for any region to have a caesarean section rate higher than 10–15%’.1 Over the years, this quote has become ubiquitous in scientific literature, being interpreted as the ideal CS rate. Although this reference range was intended for ‘populations’, which are defined by geopolitical boundaries, in many instances it has been mistakenly used as the measurement for healthcare facilities regardless of their complexity or other characteristics. In addition to the case mix of the obstetric population served, the use of CS at healthcare facilities is also affected by factors such as their capacity to handle cases, availability of resource and the clinical management protocols used locally.

Macrosomia in 23 developing countries: an analysis of a multicountry, facility-based, cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND Macrosomia is a risk factor for adverse delivery outcomes. We investigated the prevalence, risk factors, and delivery outcomes of babies with macrosomia in 23 developing countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. METHODS We analysed data from WHOs Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health, which was a facility-based cross-sectional study that obtained data for women giving birth in 373 health facilities in 24 countries in Africa and Latin America in 2004-05, and in Asia in 2007-08. Facilities were selected by stratified multistage cluster sampling and women were recruited at admission for delivery. We extracted data from the medical records with a standardised questionnaire. We used logistic regression with random effects to assess the risk factors for macrosomia and the risks for caesarean section and adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes (assessed by a composite score) in babies with the disorder. FINDINGS Of 290,610 deliveries, we analysed data for 276,436 singleton livebirths or fresh stillbirths. Higher maternal age (20-34 years), height, parity, body-mass index, and presence of diabetes, post-term pregnancy, and male fetal sex were associated with a significantly increased risk of macrosomia. Macrosomia was associated with an increased risk of caesarean section because of obstructed labour and post-term pregnancy in all regions. Additionally, macrosomia was associated with an increased risk of adverse maternal birth outcomes in all regions, and of adverse perinatal outcomes only in Africa. INTERPRETATION Increasing prevalence of diabetes and obesity in women of reproductive age in developing countries could be associated with a parallel increase in macrosomic births. The effect and feasibility of control of diabetes and preconception weight on macrosomia should be investigated in these settings. Furthermore, increased institutional delivery in countries where rates are low could be crucial to reduce macrosomia-associated morbidity and mortality. FUNDING None.

Advanced maternal age and pregnancy outcomes: a multicountry assessment.

To assess the association between advanced maternal age (AMA) and adverse pregnancy outcomes.

Obstetric transition: the pathway towards ending preventable maternal deaths

ending preventable maternal deaths JP Souza, € O Tunc alp, JP Vogel, M Bohren, M Widmer, OT Oladapo, L Say, AM G€ ulmezoglu, M Temmerman a UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), Department of Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland b Department of Social Medicine, Ribeirao Preto Medical School, University of Sao Paulo, Ribeirao Preto, Sao Paulo, Brazil c Glide Technical Cooperation and Research, Ribeirao Preto, Sao Paulo, Brazil d Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, ML, USA Correspondence: JP Souza, Department of Social Medicine, Ribeirao Preto Medical School, University of Sao Paulo, Avenida Bandeirantes, 3900, Ribeirao Preto, Sao Paulo, Brazil 14049-900 Email jpsouza@fmrp.usp.br

Postpartum haemorrhage management, risks, and maternal outcomes: findings from the World Health Organization Multicountry Survey on Maternal and Newborn Health

To explore the clinical practices, risks, and maternal outcomes associated with postpartum haemorrhage (PPH).

Maternal complications and perinatal mortality: findings of the World Health Organization Multicountry Survey on Maternal and Newborn Health

We aimed to determine the prevalence and risks of late fetal deaths (LFDs) and early neonatal deaths (ENDs) in women with medical and obstetric complications.

What is the optimal rate of caesarean section at population level? A systematic review of ecologic studies

In 1985, WHO stated that there was no justification for caesarean section (CS) rates higher than 10–15 % at population-level. While the CS rates worldwide have continued to increase in an unprecedented manner over the subsequent three decades, concern has been raised about the validity of the 1985 landmark statement. We conducted a systematic review to identify, critically appraise and synthesize the analyses of the ecologic association between CS rates and maternal, neonatal and infant outcomes. Four electronic databases were searched for ecologic studies published between 2000 and 2014 that analysed the possible association between CS rates and maternal, neonatal or infant mortality or morbidity. Two reviewers performed study selection, data extraction and quality assessment independently. We identified 11,832 unique citations and eight studies were included in the review. Seven studies correlated CS rates with maternal mortality, five with neonatal mortality, four with infant mortality, two with LBW and one with stillbirths. Except for one, all studies were cross-sectional in design and five were global analyses of national-level CS rates versus mortality outcomes. Although the overall quality of the studies was acceptable; only two studies controlled for socio-economic factors and none controlled for clinical or demographic characteristics of the population. In unadjusted analyses, authors found a strong inverse relationship between CS rates and the mortality outcomes so that maternal, neonatal and infant mortality decrease as CS rates increase up to a certain threshold. In the eight studies included in this review, this threshold was at CS rates between 9 and 16 %. However, in the two studies that adjusted for socio-economic factors, this relationship was either weakened or disappeared after controlling for these confounders. CS rates above the threshold of 9–16 % were not associated with decreases in mortality outcomes regardless of adjustments. Our findings could be interpreted to mean that at CS rates below this threshold, socio-economic development may be driving the ecologic association between CS rates and mortality. On the other hand, at rates higher than this threshold, there is no association between CS and mortality outcomes regardless of adjustment. The ecological association between CS rates and relevant morbidity outcomes needs to be evaluated before drawing more definite conclusions at population level.