Development and internal validation of a multivariable model to predict perinatal death in pregnancy hypertension

Article English OPEN
Payne, Beth A. ; Groen, Henk ; Ukah, U. Vivian ; Ansermino, J. Mark ; Bhutta, Zulfiqar ; Grobman, William ; Hall, David R. ; Hutcheon, Jennifer A. ; Magee, Laura A. ; von Dadelszen, Peter (2015)
  • Publisher: Elsevier BV
  • Journal: Pregnancy Hypertension: An International Journal of Women's Cardiovascular Health, volume 5, issue 4, pages 315-321 (issn: 2210-7789)
  • Related identifiers: doi: 10.1016/j.preghy.2015.08.006
  • Subject: Obstetrics and Gynaecology | Internal Medicine | Stillbirth | Pre-eclampsia | Perinatal death | Prognosis | Low-resourced setting

Objective To develop and internally validate a prognostic model for perinatal death that could guide community-based antenatal care of women with a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy (HDP) in low-resourced settings as part of a mobile health application.\ud Study Design\ud \ud Using data from 1688 women (110 (6.5%) perinatal deaths) admitted to hospital after 32 weeks gestation with a HDP from five low-resourced countries in the miniPIERS prospective cohort, a logistic regression model to predict perinatal death was developed and internally validated. Model discrimination, calibration, and classification accuracy were assessed and compared with use of gestational age alone to determine prognosis.\ud \ud Main outcome measures: Stillbirth or neonatal death before hospital discharge.\ud Results\ud \ud The final model included maternal age; a count of symptoms (0, 1 or ⩾ 2); and dipstick proteinuria. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.75 [95% CI 0.71 - 0.80]. The model correctly identified 42/110 (38.2%) additional cases as high-risk (probability >15%) of perinatal death compared with use of only gestational age <34 weeks at assessment with increased sensitivity (48.6% vs. 23.8%) and similar specificity (86.6% vs. 90.0%).\ud Conclusion\ud \ud Using simple, routinely collected measures during antenatal care, we can identify women with a HDP who are at increased risk of perinatal death and who would benefit from transfer to facility-based care. This model requires external validation and assessment in an implementation study to confirm performance.
  • References (9)

    (1) Cousens S, Blencowe H, Stanton C, et al. National, regional, and worldwide estimates of stillbirth rates in 2009 with trends since 1995: A systematic analysis. Lancet. 2011;377(9774):1319-1330.

    (2) Lawn JE, Blencowe H, Pattinson R, et al. Stillbirths: Where? when? why? how to make the data count?. Lancet. 2011;377(9775):1448-1463.

    (3) Wang H, Liddell CA, Coates MM, et al. Global, regional and national levels of neonatal, infant and under-5 mortality during 1990-2013: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. Lancet. published online May2, 2014.

    (4) Lozano R, Wang H, Foreman KJ, et al. Progress towards millennium development goals 4 and 5 on maternal and child mortality: An updated systematic analysis. Lancet. 2011;378(9797):1139-1165.

    (5) Bhutta ZA, Black RE. Global maternal, newborn, and child health--so near and yet so far. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(23):2226-2235.

    (6) McClure EM, Pasha O, Goudar SS, et al. Epidemiology of stillbirth in low-middle income countries: A global network study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2011;90(12):1379-1385.

    25. Martin JN,Jr, Thigpen BD, Moore RC, Rose CH, Cushman J, May W. Stroke and severe preeclampsia and eclampsia: A paradigm shift focusing on systolic blood pressure. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;105(2):246-254.

    26. Schuit E, Hukkelhoven CW, Manktelow BN, et al. Prognostic models for stillbirth and neonatal death in very preterm birth: A validation study. Pediatrics. 2012;129(1):e120-7.

    27. Goldenberg RL, McClure EM, Jobe AH, Kamath-Rayne BD, Gravette MG, Rubens CE. Stillbirths and neonatal mortality as outcomes. International Journal of Gynaecology & Obstetrics. 2013;123(3):252-253.

  • Metrics
    No metrics available
Share - Bookmark