Are pregnancy outcomes associated with risk factor reporting in routinely collected perinatal data?
Amanda J. Ampt A C , Jane B. Ford A , Lee K. Taylor B and Christine L. Roberts AA Kolling Institute of Medical Research, The University of Sydney
B Centre for Epidemiology and Evidence, NSW Ministry of Health
C Corresponding author. Email: amanda.ampt@sydney.edu.au
NSW Public Health Bulletin 24(2) 65-69 https://doi.org/10.1071/NB12116
Published: 7 November 2013
Abstract
Aim: To assess reporting characteristics of commonly dichotomised pregnancy outcomes (e.g. preterm/term birth); and to investigate whether behaviours (e.g. smoking), medical conditions (e.g. diabetes) or interventions (e.g. induction) were reported differently by pregnancy outcomes. Methods: Further analysis of a previous validation study was undertaken, in which 1680 perinatal records were compared with data extracted from medical records. Continuous and polytomous variables were dichotomised, and risk factor reporting was assessed within the dichotomised outcome groups. Agreement, kappa, sensitivity and positive predictive value calculations were undertaken. Results: Gestational age, birthweight, Apgar scores, perineal trauma, regional analgesia and baby discharge status (live birth/stillbirth) were reported with high accuracy and reliability when dichotomised (kappa values 0.95–1.00, sensitivities 94.7–100.0%). Although not statistically significant, there were trends for hypertension, infant resuscitation and instrumental birth to be more accurately reported among births with adverse outcomes. In contrast, smoking ascertainment tended to be poorer among preterm births and when babies were <2500 g. Conclusion: Dichotomising variables collected as continuous or polytomous variables in birth data results in accurate and well ascertained data items. There is no evidence of systematic differential reporting of risk factors.
References
[1] Benchimol EI, Manuel DG, To T, Griffiths AM, Rabeneck L, Guttmann A. Development and use of reporting guidelines for assessing the quality of validation studies of health administrative data. J Clin Epidemiol 2011; 64 821–9.| Development and use of reporting guidelines for assessing the quality of validation studies of health administrative data.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21194889PubMed |
[2] Roberts CL, Bell JC, Ford JB, Morris JM. Monitoring the quality of maternity care: How well are labour and delivery events reported in population health data? Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2009; 23 144–52.
| Monitoring the quality of maternity care: How well are labour and delivery events reported in population health data?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 19159400PubMed |
[3] Taylor L, Pym M, Bajuk B, Sutton L, Travis S, Banks C. Validation study: NSW Midwives Data Collection 1998. N S W Public Health Bull Supplementary Series 2000; 9 97–9.
| Validation study: NSW Midwives Data Collection 1998.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[4] Lain SJ, Hadfield RM, Raynes-Greenow CH, Ford JB, Mealing NM, Algert CS, et al. Quality of data in perinatal population health databases: a systematic review. Med Care 2012; 50 e7–20.
| Quality of data in perinatal population health databases: a systematic review.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21617569PubMed |
[5] Ford JB, Roberts CL, Simpson JM, Vaughan J, Cameron CA. Increased postpartum hemorrhage rates in Australia. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2007; 98 237–43.
| Increased postpartum hemorrhage rates in Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2svnt1amtQ%3D%3D&md5=56ed68c449c2a0f6a9ca559359f35972CAS | 17482190PubMed |
[6] Roberts CL, Algert CS, Morris JM, Ford JB, Henderson-Smart DJ. Hypertensive disorders in pregnancy: A population-based study. Med J Aust 2005; 182 332–5.
| 15804223PubMed |
[7] Schoendorf KC, Branum AM. The use of United States vital statistics in perinatal and obstetric research. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006; 194 911–5.
| The use of United States vital statistics in perinatal and obstetric research.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 16580275PubMed |
[8] Roberts C, Lain S, Hadfield R. Quality of population health data reporting by mode of delivery. Birth 2007; 34 274–5.
| Quality of population health data reporting by mode of delivery.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 17718880PubMed |
[9] Roberts CL, Bell JC, Ford JB, Hadfield RM, Algert CS, Morris JM. The accuracy of reporting of the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in population health data. Hypertens Pregnancy 2008; 27 285–97.
| The accuracy of reporting of the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in population health data.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18696357PubMed |
[10] Cnattingius S. The epidemiology of smoking during pregnancy: smoking prevalence, maternal characteristics, and pregnancy outcomes. Nicotine Tob Res 2004; 6 S125–40.
| The epidemiology of smoking during pregnancy: smoking prevalence, maternal characteristics, and pregnancy outcomes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 15203816PubMed |
[11] Rosenberg TJ, Garbers S, Lipkind H, Chiasson MA. Maternal obesity and diabetes as risk factors for adverse pregnancy outcomes: differences among 4 racial/ethnic groups. Am J Public Health 2005; 95 1545–51.
| Maternal obesity and diabetes as risk factors for adverse pregnancy outcomes: differences among 4 racial/ethnic groups.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 16118366PubMed |
[12] Makgoba M, Savvidou MD, Steer PJ. The effect of maternal characteristics and gestational diabetes on birthweight. BJOG 2012; 119 1091–7.
| The effect of maternal characteristics and gestational diabetes on birthweight.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BC38npvVentg%3D%3D&md5=0aef19e5c0f1f7e25d347e21610cefa7CAS | 22676578PubMed |
[13] Mikolajczyk RT, Zhang J, Troendle J, Chan L. Risk factors for birth canal lacerations in primiparous women. Am J Perinatol 2008; 25 259–64.
| Risk factors for birth canal lacerations in primiparous women.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18509884PubMed |
[14] Maslow AS, Sweeny AL. Elective induction of labor as a risk factor for cesarean delivery among low-risk women at term. Obstet Gynecol 2000; 95 917–22.
| Elective induction of labor as a risk factor for cesarean delivery among low-risk women at term.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3czisFeqtA%3D%3D&md5=38972a22a6c7b5e00620061f5df631a3CAS | 10831992PubMed |
