R C Pattinson1, L Say, J D Makin, M H Bastos. 1. University of Pretoria, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Kalafong Hospital, Private Bag X396, Pretoria, Gauteng, South Africa 0001. rcpattin@kalafong.up.ac.za
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Audit and feedback of critical incidents is an established part of obstetric practice. However, the effect on perinatal and maternal mortality is unclear. The potential harmful effects and costs are unknown. OBJECTIVES: Is critical incident audit and feedback effective in reducing the perinatal mortality rate, the maternal mortality ratio, and severe neonatal and maternal morbidity? SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Trials Register (January 2005), the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group Trials Register (January 2005), MEDLINE (1965 to December 2004), EMBASE (1965 to December 2004), SCIBASE (1965 to December 2004) and the World Health Organization systematic review of maternal mortality and morbidity database (January 1997 to December 2002). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized trials of audit (defined as any summary of clinical performance over a specified period of time) and feedback (method of feeding that information back to the clinicians) that reported objectively measured professional practice in a healthcare setting or healthcare outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: No suitable trials were found. MAIN RESULTS: None. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The necessity of recording the number and cause of deaths is not in question. Mortality rates are essential in identifying problems within the healthcare system. Maternal and perinatal death reviews should continue to be held, until further information is available. The evidence from serial data clearly suggests more benefit than harm. Feedback is essential in any audit system. The most effective mechanisms for this are unknown, but it must be directed at the relevant people.
BACKGROUND: Audit and feedback of critical incidents is an established part of obstetric practice. However, the effect on perinatal and maternal mortality is unclear. The potential harmful effects and costs are unknown. OBJECTIVES: Is critical incident audit and feedback effective in reducing the perinatal mortality rate, the maternal mortality ratio, and severe neonatal and maternal morbidity? SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Trials Register (January 2005), the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group Trials Register (January 2005), MEDLINE (1965 to December 2004), EMBASE (1965 to December 2004), SCIBASE (1965 to December 2004) and the World Health Organization systematic review of maternal mortality and morbidity database (January 1997 to December 2002). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized trials of audit (defined as any summary of clinical performance over a specified period of time) and feedback (method of feeding that information back to the clinicians) that reported objectively measured professional practice in a healthcare setting or healthcare outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: No suitable trials were found. MAIN RESULTS: None. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The necessity of recording the number and cause of deaths is not in question. Mortality rates are essential in identifying problems within the healthcare system. Maternal and perinatal death reviews should continue to be held, until further information is available. The evidence from serial data clearly suggests more benefit than harm. Feedback is essential in any audit system. The most effective mechanisms for this are unknown, but it must be directed at the relevant people.
Authors: Stacy Beck; Daniel Wojdyla; Lale Say; Ana Pilar Betran; Mario Merialdi; Jennifer Harris Requejo; Craig Rubens; Ramkumar Menon; Paul F A Van Look Journal: Bull World Health Organ Date: 2009-09-25 Impact factor: 9.408
Authors: Zulfiqar A Bhutta; Mickey Chopra; Henrik Axelson; Peter Berman; Ties Boerma; Jennifer Bryce; Flavia Bustreo; Eleonora Cavagnero; Giorgio Cometto; Bernadette Daelmans; Andres de Francisco; Helga Fogstad; Neeru Gupta; Laura Laski; Joy Lawn; Blerta Maliqi; Elizabeth Mason; Catherine Pitt; Jennifer Requejo; Ann Starrs; Cesar G Victora; Tessa Wardlaw Journal: Lancet Date: 2010-06-05 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Joy E Lawn; Anne C C Lee; Mary Kinney; Lynn Sibley; Wally A Carlo; Vinod K Paul; Robert Pattinson; Gary L Darmstadt Journal: Int J Gynaecol Obstet Date: 2009-10 Impact factor: 3.561
Authors: Joy E Lawn; Michael G Gravett; Toni M Nunes; Craig E Rubens; Cynthia Stanton Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2010-02-23 Impact factor: 3.007
Authors: Angelo S Nyamtema; David P Urassa; Andrea B Pembe; Felix Kisanga; Jos van Roosmalen Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2010-06-03 Impact factor: 3.007
Authors: Zulfiqar A Bhutta; Gary L Darmstadt; Rachel A Haws; Mohammad Yawar Yakoob; Joy E Lawn Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2009-05-07 Impact factor: 3.007