Developing a framework to review near-miss maternal morbidity in India: a structured review and key stakeholder analysis

BMC Health Services Research

Marian Knight²  Aradhana Srivastava¹  Sanghita Bhattacharyya¹ 

[1] Public Health Foundation of India, New Delhi, India;National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7LF, UK

关键词: India;    Framework;    Quality of care;    Audit;    Near-miss;   

Others  :  1091970
DOI  :  10.1186/s12913-014-0553-x

 received in 2014-03-31, accepted in 2014-10-24,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

In India there is a thrust towards promoting institutional delivery, resulting in problems of overcrowding and compromise to quality of care. Review of near-miss obstetric events has been suggested to be useful to investigate health system functioning, complementing maternal death reviews. The aim of this project was to identify the key elements required for a near-miss review programme for India.

Methods

A structured review was conducted to identify methods used in assessing near-miss cases. The findings of the structured review were used to develop a suggested framework for conducting near-miss reviews in India. A pool of experts in near-miss review methods in low and middle income countries (LMICs) was identified for vetting the framework developed. Opinions were sought about the feasibility of implementing near-miss reviews in India, the processes to be followed, factors that made implementation successful and the associated challenges. A draft of the framework was revised based on the experts’ opinions.

Results

Five broad methods of near-miss case review/audit were identified: Facility-based near-miss case review, confidential enquiries, criterion-based clinical audit, structured case review (South African Model) and home-based interviews. The opinion of the 11 stakeholders highlighted that the methods that a facility adopts should depend on the type and number of cases the facility handles, availability and maintenance of a good documentation system, and local leadership and commitment of staff. A proposed framework for conducting near-miss reviews was developed that included a combination of criterion-based clinical audit and near-miss review methods.

Conclusion

The approach allowed for development of a framework for researchers and planners seeking to improve quality of maternal care not only at the facility level but also beyond, encompassing community health workers and referral. Further work is needed to evaluate the implementation of this framework to determine its efficacy in improving the quality of care and hence maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Bhattacharyya et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Beyond the Numbers: Reviewing Deaths and Complications to Make Pregnancy Safer. WHO, Geneva; 2004.
• [2]Costello A, Azad K, Barnett S: An alternative strategy to reduce maternal mortality. Lancet 2006, 368(9546):1477-1479.
• [3]The World Bank and United Nation Population Division: Trends in Maternal Mortality: 1990 to 2013. WHO, Geneva; 2014.
• [4]Maternal Mortality in 2005. WHO, Geneva; 2007.
• [5]Pattinson R: Near miss audit in obstetrics. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2009, 23:285-286.
• [6]Campbell OM, Graham WJ: Strategies for reducing maternal mortality: getting on with what works. Lancet 2006, 368(9543):1284-1299.
• [7]Maine D: Detours and shortcuts on the road to maternal mortality reduction. Lancet 2007, 370(9595):1380-1382.
• [8]Evaluating the Quality of Care for Severe Pregnancy Complications: The WHO Near-Miss Approach for Maternal Health. WHO, Geneva; 2011.
• [9]Filippi V, Ronsmans C, Gohou V, Goufodji S, Lardi M, Sahel A, Saizonou J, De Brouwere V: Maternity wards or emergency obstetric rooms? Incidence of near-miss events in African hospitals. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2005, 84:11-16.
• [10]Penney G, Brace V: Near miss audit in obstetrics. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2007, 19(2):145-150.
• [11]Hutchinson C, Lange I, Kanhonou L, Filippi V, Borchert M: Exploring the sustainability of obstetric near-miss case reviews: a qualitative study in the south of Benin. Midwifery 2010, 26:537-543.
• [12]Pattinson RC, Buchmann E, Mantel G, Schoon M, Rees H: Can enquiries into severe acute maternal morbidity act as a surrogate for maternal death enquiries? BJOG 2003, 110:889-893.
• [13]Cochet L, Pattinson RC, MacDonald AP: Severe acute maternal morbidity and maternal death audit- a rapid diagnostic tool for evaluating maternal care. S Afr Med J 2003, 93:700-702.
• [14]The Confidential Enquiry into Maternal and Child Health (CEMACH). Saving Mothers’ Lives: reviewing maternal deaths to make motherhood safer-2003-2005. In The Seventh Report on Confidential Enquiries into Maternal Deaths in the United Kingdom. Edited by Lewis G. London: CEMACH; 2007.
• [15]Say L, Pattinson RC, Gülmezoglu AM: WHO systematic review of maternal morbidity and mortality: the prevalence of severe acute maternal morbidity (near miss). Reprod Health 2004, 1(1):3. BioMed Central Full Text
• [16]Pattinson RC, Hall M: Near misses: a useful adjunct to maternal death enquiries. Br Med Bull 2003, 67:231-243.
• [17]Filippi V, Brugha R, Browne E, Gohou V, Bacci A, De Brouwere V, Sahel A, Goufodji S, Alihonou E, Ronsmans C: Obstetric audit in resource-poor settings: lessons from a multi-country project auditing ‘near miss’ obstetrical emergencies. Health Policy Plan 2004, 19(1):57-66.
• [18]Prual A, Bouvier-Colle M-H, De Bernis L, Bréart G: Severe maternal morbidity from direct obstetric causes in West Africa: incidence and case fatality rates. Bull World Health Organ 2000, 78:593-602.
• [19]Ronsmans C, Filippi V: Reviewing severe maternal morbidity: learning from survivors from life-threatening complications. In Beyond the Numbers: Reviewing Deaths and Complications to Make Pregnancy Safer. World Health Organization, Geneva; 2004:103-124.
• [20]Coverage Evaluation Survey, All India Report. UNICEF India Country Office, New Delhi; 2005.
• [21]Coverage Evaluation Survey. National Fact Sheet. UNICEF India Country Office, New Delhi; 2009.
• [22]National Rural Health Mission. Maternal Death Review Guidebook. 2011.
• [23]D’Ambruoso L, Achadi E, Adisasmita A, Izati Y, Makowiecka K, Hussein J: Assessing quality of care provided by Indonesian village midwives with a confidential enquiry. Midwifery 2009, 25:528-539.
• [24]Bacci A, Lewis G, Baltag V, Betrand VP: The introduction of confidential enquiries into maternal deaths and near-miss case reviews in the WHO European Region. Reprod Health Matt 2007, 15(30):145-152.
• [25]Graham W, Wagaarachchi P, Penney G, McCaw-Binns A, Yeboah Antwi K, Hall MH: Criteria for clinical audit of the quality of hospital-based obstetric care in developing countries. Bull World Health Organ 2000, 78(5):614-620.
• [26]Graham WJ: Criterion-based clinical audit in obstetrics: bridging the quality gap? Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2009, 23:375-388.
• [27]Say L, Souza JP, Pattinson RC: Maternal near miss – towards a standard tool for monitoring quality of maternal health care. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2009, 23:287-296.
• [28]Filippi V, Richard F, Lange I, Ouattara F: Identifying barriers from home to the appropriate hospital through near-miss audits in developing countries. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2009, 23(3):389-400.
• [29]Thaddeus S, Maine D: Too far to walk: maternal mortality in context. Soc Sci Med 1994, 38:1091-1110.
• [30]Maine D: Safe Motherhood Programs: Options and Issues. Center for Population and Family Health, Columbia University, New York; 1991.
• [31]Ganatra BR, Coyaji KJ, Rao VN: Too far, too little, too late: a community-based case–control study of maternal mortality in rural west Maharashtra, India. Bull World Health Organ 1998, 76(6):591-598.
• [32]Souza JP, Cecatti JG, Parpinelli MA, Krupa F, Osis MJD: An emerging “maternal near-miss syndrome”: narratives of women who almost died during pregnancy and childbirth. Birth 2009, 36(2):149-158.