Wolleswinkel-van den Bosch Judith H, Vredevoogd Corla B, Borkent-Polet Marion, van Eyck Jim, Fetter Willem P F, Lagro-Janssen Toine L M, Rosink Imke H, Treffers Pieter E, Wierenga Henk, Amelink Marianne, Richardus Jan-Hendrik, Verloove-Vanhorick Pauline, Mackenbach Johan P
Department of Public Health, Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2002 Jan;81(1):17-24. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0412.2002.810104.x.
To determine: 1) whether substandard factors were present in cases of perinatal death, and to what extent another course of action might have resulted in a better outcome, and 2) whether there were differences in the frequency of substandard factors by level of care, particularly between midwives and gynecologists/obstetricians and between home and hospital births.
Population-based perinatal audit, with explicit evidence-based audit criteria.
The northern part of the province of South-Holland in The Netherlands. All levels of perinatal care (primary, secondary and tertiary care, and home and hospital births) were included.
Three hundred and forty-two cases of perinatal mortality (24 weeks of pregnancy--28 days after birth).
Scores by a Dutch and a European audit panel. Score 0: no substandard factors identified; score 1, 2 or 3: one or more substandard factors identified, which were unlikely (1), possibly (2) or probably (3) related to the perinatal death.
In 25% of the perinatal deaths (95% Confidence Interval: 20-30%) a substandard factor was identified that according to the Dutch panel was possibly or probably related to the perinatal death. These were mainly maternal/social factors (10% of all perinatal deaths; most frequent substandard factor: smoking during pregnancy), and antenatal care factors (10% of all perinatal deaths; most frequent substandard factor: detection of intra-uterine growth retardation). We did not find statistically significant differences in scores between midwives and gynecologists/obstetricians or between home and hospital births. The European panel identified more substandard factors, but these were again equally distributed by level of care.
Perinatal deaths might be partly preventable in The Netherlands. There is no evidence that the frequency of substandard factors is related to specific aspects of the perinatal care system in The Netherlands.
目的是确定:1)围产期死亡病例中是否存在不合格因素,以及采取其他行动方案在多大程度上可能带来更好的结果;2)根据护理级别,特别是助产士与妇科医生/产科医生之间以及家庭分娩与医院分娩之间,不合格因素的频率是否存在差异。
基于人群的围产期审计,采用明确的循证审计标准。
荷兰南荷兰省北部。纳入了所有级别的围产期护理(初级、二级和三级护理,以及家庭分娩和医院分娩)。
342例围产期死亡病例(妊娠24周 - 出生后28天)。
由荷兰和欧洲审计小组给出的评分。评分0:未发现不合格因素;评分1、2或3:发现一个或多个不合格因素,这些因素不太可能(1)、可能(2)或很可能(3)与围产期死亡有关。
在25%的围产期死亡病例中(95%置信区间:20 - 30%),发现了一个根据荷兰小组判断可能或很可能与围产期死亡有关的不合格因素。这些主要是母亲/社会因素(占所有围产期死亡病例的10%;最常见的不合格因素:孕期吸烟)和产前护理因素(占所有围产期死亡病例的10%;最常见的不合格因素:发现胎儿宫内生长受限)。我们未发现助产士与妇科医生/产科医生之间或家庭分娩与医院分娩之间在评分上有统计学显著差异。欧洲小组发现了更多不合格因素,但这些因素在护理级别上同样分布。
在荷兰,围产期死亡可能部分是可预防的。没有证据表明不合格因素的频率与荷兰围产期护理系统的特定方面有关。