Jahn A, Berle P
Institut für Tropenhygiene und öffentliches Gesundheitswesen, Universität Heidelberg.
Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 1996 Mar;56(3):132-8. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-1022279.
In the Federal State of Hesse, Germany, pregnancy and delivery related data are collected in a central perinatal registry called "Hessische Perinatalerhebung" (HEPE) since 1981, the objective being to enforce quality assurance and to contribute to a reduction in perinatal mortality and morbidity. The delivery unit compiles these data based on the antenatal record called "Mother Passport" and the actual delivery. In order to check on the quality of data, information on risk factors obtained from the perinatal register was compared to information from antenatal records and from a questionnaire administered to pregnant women prior to delivery. The study population comprised 1978 women who delivered at the maternity unit of the Municipal Hospital of Wiesbaden, the Dr. Horst Schmidt Kliniken, in 1990 and 1991. Comparison of the three data sources revealed substantial differences: Almost all risk factors were most frequently mentioned by the mothers themselves, less by the antenatal record and even less by the perinatal register. These differences were less pronounced for data on previous pregnancies and pre-existing disease and on abnormal positioning. Considerable differences were found in relation to pregnancy induced hypertension, intra-uterine growth retardation, incapacity of the cervix, preterm labour and bleeding. Risk factors related to the social environment and personal habits like psycho-social stress and smoking were found to be extremely under-reported in the antenatal records as well as in the perinatal register. The following factors could be identified as major reasons for the different risk profiles obtained from the various data sources: [1] Data loss through the transfer of data from the antenatal record to the record form of the perinatal register or to the computer, [2] selective recording of those risk factors considered by doctors to be particularly relevant, [3] missing definition of some risk factors and [4] recording of antenatal data for the perinatal register by the delivery unit after knowing the pregnancy outcome. Antenatal data in the perinatal register of Hessen are doubtful and should not be used uncritically for comparative studies and the assessment of relative risks. The extreme under-reporting of some risk factors may even lead to giving some interventions undue priority. In future, regular validity studies should become routine. A reduction of the data losses as well as a clear separation of antenatal data and delivery data could be achieved if antenatal data would be transferred from the doctor providing antenatal care direct to the perinatal register.
在德国黑森州,自1981年起,与妊娠和分娩相关的数据在一个名为“黑森州围产期调查”(HEPE)的中央围产期登记处收集,目的是加强质量保证并有助于降低围产期死亡率和发病率。分娩单位根据名为“母亲护照”的产前记录和实际分娩情况汇编这些数据。为了检查数据质量,将从围产期登记处获得的风险因素信息与产前记录以及分娩前对孕妇进行问卷调查得到的信息进行了比较。研究人群包括1978名于1990年和1991年在威斯巴登市立医院霍斯特·施密特诊所产科分娩的妇女。对这三个数据源的比较揭示了显著差异:几乎所有风险因素母亲自己提及的频率最高,产前记录提及的较少,围产期登记处提及的更少。对于既往妊娠、既往疾病和胎位异常的数据,这些差异不太明显。在妊娠高血压、宫内生长受限、宫颈机能不全、早产和出血方面发现了相当大的差异。与社会环境和个人习惯相关的风险因素,如心理社会压力和吸烟,在产前记录以及围产期登记处中被发现报告严重不足。可以确定以下因素是从不同数据源获得不同风险概况的主要原因:[1] 数据从产前记录转移到围产期登记处的记录表格或计算机时的数据丢失,[2] 医生对被认为特别相关的那些风险因素的选择性记录,[3] 一些风险因素定义缺失,以及[4] 分娩单位在知道妊娠结局后为围产期登记处记录产前数据。黑森州围产期登记处的产前数据令人怀疑,不应不加批判地用于比较研究和相对风险评估。一些风险因素的严重报告不足甚至可能导致某些干预措施被过度优先考虑。未来,定期的有效性研究应成为常规做法。如果产前数据能从提供产前护理的医生直接传输到围产期登记处,数据丢失将会减少,产前数据和分娩数据也能得到明确区分。