Sunde Ingvild Dahl, Vekseth Christina, Rasmussen Svein, Mahjoob Elham, Collett Karin, Ebbing Cathrine
Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017 Sep;96(9):1120-1127. doi: 10.1111/aogs.13164. Epub 2017 Jun 8.
A validation of data regarding the placenta, cord and membranes in Medical Birth Registry of Norway (MBRN) is lacking. Here we investigate the inter- and intra-observer agreement of observations regarding the placenta, cord and membranes to the MBRN in two institutions.
We conducted a dual center validation study of data regarding placenta, cord and membranes. In the inter-observer study, 196 placentas in two institutions were examined by the attending midwife and a blinded colleague, whereas in the intra-observer study registrations by the attending midwife on 195 placentas were compared with her own registrations to the MBRN. In a separate sample consisting of 51 placental pathology reports, midwives' registrations to the MBRN were compared with the pathology report. For categorical and continuous variables, agreement was assessed by kappa value and paired sample t-test, respectively.
Inter-observer agreement between two midwives for cord insertion site and bi-placenta, cord knots and vessel anomalies were good (kappa values >0.79 and >0.96, respectively). The inter- and intra-observer study showed no significant differences regarding placental weight and cord length (p = 0.31 and 0.28, p = 0.71 and 0.39, respectively). The inter-observer agreement between the pathology reports and midwives' registrations was good for gross placental and cord variants (kappa 0.73-1.0), but there were significant differences in placental weight and cord length (p < 0.0001).
The results suggest that the validity of data regarding placenta and cord in the MBRN is sufficiently high to justify future large-scale epidemiologic research based on this database.
挪威医学出生登记处(MBRN)中关于胎盘、脐带和胎膜的数据缺乏验证。在此,我们调查了两个机构中关于胎盘、脐带和胎膜的观察结果在观察者间和观察者内与MBRN的一致性。
我们对胎盘、脐带和胎膜的数据进行了双中心验证研究。在观察者间研究中,两个机构的196个胎盘由主治助产士和一位不知情的同事进行检查,而在观察者内研究中,主治助产士对195个胎盘的记录与她自己在MBRN中的记录进行比较。在一个由51份胎盘病理报告组成的单独样本中,将助产士在MBRN中的记录与病理报告进行比较。对于分类变量和连续变量,分别通过kappa值和配对样本t检验评估一致性。
两位助产士在脐带插入部位、双胎盘、脐带打结和血管异常方面的观察者间一致性良好(kappa值分别>0.79和>0.96)。观察者间和观察者内研究显示,胎盘重量和脐带长度方面无显著差异(p分别为0.31和0.28,p分别为0.71和0.39)。病理报告与助产士记录之间在胎盘和脐带大体变异方面的观察者间一致性良好(kappa值为0.73 - 1.0),但在胎盘重量和脐带长度方面存在显著差异(p < 0.0001)。
结果表明,MBRN中关于胎盘和脐带的数据有效性足够高,足以支持基于该数据库进行未来的大规模流行病学研究。