Academic
Publications
An evaluation of classification systems for stillbirth

An evaluation of classification systems for stillbirth,10.1186/1471-2393-9-24,BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth,Vicki Flenady,J Frederik Frøen,Halit Pinar,

An evaluation of classification systems for stillbirth   (Citations: 9)
BibTex | RIS | RefWorks Download
Vicki Flenady, J Frederik Frøen, Halit Pinar, Rozbeh Torabi, Eli Saastad, Grace Guyon, Laurie Russell, Adrian Charles, Catherine Harrison, Lawrence Chauke, Robert Pattinson, Rachel Koshyhttp://academic.research.microsoft.com/io.ashx?type=5&id=12311194&selfId1=0&selfId2=0&maxNumber=12&query=
BACKGROUND: Audit and classification of stillbirths is an essential part of clinical practice and a crucial step towards stillbirth prevention. Due to the limitations of the ICD system and lack of an international approach to an acceptable solution, numerous disparate classification systems have emerged. We assessed the performance of six contemporary systems to inform the development of an internationally accepted approach. METHODS: We evaluated the following systems: Amended Aberdeen, Extended Wigglesworth; PSANZ-PDC, ReCoDe, Tulip and CODAC. Nine teams from 7 countries applied the classification systems to cohorts of stillbirths from their regions using 857 stillbirth cases. The main outcome measures were: the ability to retain the important information about the death using the InfoKeep rating; the ease of use according to the Ease rating (both measures used a five-point scale with a score <2 considered unsatisfactory); inter-observer agreement and the proportion of unexplained stillbirths. A randomly selected subset of 100 stillbirths was used to assess inter-observer agreement. RESULTS: InfoKeep scores were significantly different across the classifications (p ≤ 0.01) due to low scores for Wigglesworth and Aberdeen. CODAC received the highest mean (SD) score of 3.40 (0.73) followed by PSANZ-PDC, ReCoDe and Tulip [2.77 (1.00), 2.36 (1.21), 1.92 (1.24) respectively]. Wigglesworth and Aberdeen resulted in a high proportion of unexplained stillbirths and CODAC and Tulip the lowest. While Ease scores were different (p ≤ 0.01), all systems received satisfactory scores; CODAC received the highest score. Aberdeen and Wigglesworth showed poor agreement with kappas of 0.35 and 0.25 respectively. Tulip performed best with a kappa of 0.74. The remainder had good to fair agreement. CONCLUSION: The Extended Wigglesworth and Amended Aberdeen systems cannot be recommended for classification of stillbirths. Overall, CODAC performed best with PSANZ-PDC and ReCoDe performing well. Tulip was shown to have the best agreement and a low proportion of unexplained stillbirths. The virtues of these systems need to be considered in the development of an international solution to classification of stillbirths. Further studies are required on the performance of classification systems in the context of developing countries. Suboptimal agreement highlights the importance of instituting measures to ensure consistency for any classification system.
Journal: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth - BMC Pregnancy Childbirth , vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 24-13, 2009
Cumulative Annual
View Publication
The following links allow you to view full publications. These links are maintained by other sources not affiliated with Microsoft Academic Search.
    • ...In Western Africa, the intrapartum stillbirth rate was estimated at 15/1000 in 2004 (36% of stillbirths), 50 times higher than the rate in North America of 0.3/1000 (10% of stillbirths) [7,49]...
    • ...Placental pathology, including those cases manifesting clinically as maternal hypertensive disorders, contribute to the underlying cause of death in 6 out of 10 stillbirths in low-income countries [49,64]...
    • ...A classification system should be an information management tool [49,50]...

    J Frederik Frøenet al. Making stillbirths count, making numbers talk - Issues in data collect...

Sort by: