Lee Erica, Toprani Amita, Begier Elizabeth, Genovese Richard, Madsen Ann, Gambatese Melissa
Bureau of Vital Statistics, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, 125 Worth St., Room 219B, CN-7, New York, NY, 10013, USA.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA, USA.
Matern Child Health J. 2016 Feb;20(2):337-46. doi: 10.1007/s10995-015-1833-8.
Perinatal mortality prevention strategies that target fetal deaths often utilize vital records data sets shown to contain critical quality deficiencies. To understand the causes of deficient data, we linked survey responses of fetal death reporters with facility fetal death data quality indicators.
In 2011, we surveyed the person most responsible for fetal death reporting at New York City healthcare facilities on their attitudes, barriers, and practices regarding reporting. We compared responses by 2 facility data quality indicators (data completeness and ill-defined cause of fetal death) for third trimester fetal death registrations using Chi squared tests.
Thirty-nine of 50 facilities completed full questionnaires (78 % response rate); responding facilities reported 84 % (n = 11,891) of all 2011 fetal deaths, including 329 third trimester fetal deaths. Facilities citing ≥1 reporting barrier were approximately five times more likely to have incomplete third trimester registrations than facilities citing no substantial barriers (37.5 vs 7.9 %; RR 4.7; 95 % CI [1.6-14.2]). Reported barriers included onerous reporting requirements (n = 10; 26 %) and competing physician priorities (n = 11; 28 %). Facilities citing difficulty involving physicians in reporting were more likely to report fetal deaths with nonspecific cause-of-death information (70.9 vs 56.6 %; RR 1.3; 95 % CI [1.1-1.5]).
Self-reported challenges correlate with completeness and accuracy of reported fetal death data, suggesting that such barriers are likely contributing to low quality data. We identified several improvement opportunities, including in-depth training and reducing the information collected, especially for early fetal deaths (<20 weeks' gestation), the majority of events reported.
针对胎儿死亡的围产期死亡率预防策略通常利用已显示存在严重质量缺陷的生命记录数据集。为了解数据存在缺陷的原因,我们将胎儿死亡报告者的调查回复与机构胎儿死亡数据质量指标进行了关联。
2011年,我们对纽约市医疗机构中负责胎儿死亡报告的人员进行了调查,了解他们在报告方面的态度、障碍和做法。我们使用卡方检验,比较了2个机构数据质量指标(数据完整性和胎儿死亡原因不明)在孕晚期胎儿死亡登记中的回复情况。
50家机构中有39家完成了完整问卷(回复率78%);回复机构报告了2011年所有胎儿死亡病例的84%(n = 11,891),其中包括329例孕晚期胎儿死亡。与未提及重大障碍的机构相比,提及≥1个报告障碍的机构孕晚期登记不完整的可能性大约高五倍(37.5%对7.9%;相对风险4.7;95%置信区间[1.6 - 14.2])。报告的障碍包括繁琐的报告要求(n = 10;26%)和医生的其他优先事项(n = 11;28%)。提及在报告中让医生参与存在困难的机构,更有可能报告死因信息不明确的胎儿死亡病例(70.9%对56.6%;相对风险1.3;95%置信区间[1.1 - 1.5])。
自我报告的挑战与报告的胎儿死亡数据的完整性和准确性相关,表明此类障碍可能导致数据质量低下。我们确定了几个改进机会,包括深入培训和减少收集的信息,特别是对于早期胎儿死亡(妊娠<20周),这是报告的大多数事件。