Department of Family and Community Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA.
Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2020 Jul;34(4):440-451. doi: 10.1111/ppe.12593. Epub 2020 Jan 24.
Despite increased research using large administrative databases to identify determinants of maternal morbidity and mortality, the extent to which these databases capture obstetric co-morbidities is unknown.
To evaluate the impact that the time window used to assess obstetric co-morbidities has on the completeness of ascertainment of those co-morbidities.
We conducted a five-year analysis of inpatient hospitalisations of pregnant women from 2010-2014 using the Nationwide Readmissions Database. For each woman, using discharge diagnoses, we identified 24 conditions used to create the Obstetric Comorbidity Index. Using various assessment windows for capturing obstetric co-morbidities, including the delivery hospitalisation only and all weekly windows from 7 to 280 days, we calculated the frequency and rate of each co-morbidity and the degree of underascertainment of the co-morbidity. Under each scenario, and for each co-morbidity, we also calculated the all-cause, 30-day readmission rate.
There were over 3 million delivery hospitalisations from 2010 to 2014 included in this analysis. Compared with a full 280-day window, assessment of obstetric co-morbidities using only diagnoses made during the delivery hospitalisation would result in failing to identify over 35% of cases of chronic renal disease, 28.5% cases in which alcohol abuse was documented during pregnancy, and 23.1% of women with pulmonary hypertension. For seven other co-morbidities, at least 1 in 20 women with that condition would have been missed with exclusive reliance on the delivery hospitalisation for co-morbidity diagnoses. Not only would reliance on delivery hospitalisations have resulted in missed cases of co-morbidities, but for many conditions, estimates of readmission rates for women with obstetric co-morbidities would have been underestimated.
An increasing proportion of maternal and child health research is based on large administrative databases. This study provides data that facilitate the assessment of the degree to which important obstetric co-morbidities may be underascertained when using these databases.
尽管越来越多的研究使用大型行政数据库来确定孕产妇发病率和死亡率的决定因素,但这些数据库对产科合并症的捕获程度尚不清楚。
评估评估产科合并症的时间窗口对这些合并症的确定完整性的影响。
我们使用全国再入院数据库对 2010-2014 年期间住院孕妇的住院情况进行了为期五年的分析。对于每位女性,我们根据出院诊断确定了 24 种用于创建产科合并症指数的疾病。使用各种评估窗口来捕获产科合并症,包括仅分娩住院和 7 至 280 天的所有每周窗口,我们计算了每种合并症的频率和发生率以及合并症的未发现程度。在每种情况下,并且对于每种合并症,我们还计算了所有原因的 30 天再入院率。
本分析共纳入了 2010 年至 2014 年超过 300 万次分娩住院。与完整的 280 天窗口相比,仅在分娩住院期间评估产科合并症将导致超过 35%的慢性肾脏疾病病例、28.5%的妊娠期记录的酒精滥用病例和 23.1%的肺动脉高压病例无法识别。对于另外七种合并症,至少有 1/20 患有该疾病的女性如果仅依赖分娩住院诊断,将被遗漏。仅依赖分娩住院会导致合并症病例的遗漏,而且对于许多病症,患有产科合并症的女性的再入院率估计值将会被低估。
越来越多的母婴健康研究基于大型行政数据库。本研究提供的数据有助于评估在使用这些数据库时,重要的产科合并症可能被低估的程度。