Adverse pregnancy outcomes in rural Uganda (1996-2013): Trends and associated factors from serial cross sectional surveys

listen audio

Study Justification:
– Community-based evidence on pregnancy outcomes in rural Africa is lacking
– This evidence is needed to guide maternal and child health interventions
Study Highlights:
– The study estimated and compared adverse pregnancy outcomes and associated factors in rural south-western Uganda using two survey methods
– One third of women reported an adverse pregnancy outcome
– Abortion rates were similar between the two methods, but stillbirth rates differed
– Factors associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes were identified, such as age of mother, non-attendance of antenatal care, and proximity to the road
Study Recommendations:
– Strategies to improve prospective community-level data collection to reduce reporting biases are needed to guide maternal health interventions
Key Role Players Needed to Address Recommendations:
– Researchers and data collectors
– Community health workers
– Local government officials
– Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) working in maternal and child health
Cost Items to Include in Planning the Recommendations:
– Training and capacity building for researchers and data collectors
– Community sensitization activities
– Data collection tools and equipment
– Data management and analysis software
– Transportation and logistics for fieldwork
– Communication and dissemination of findings
Please note that the actual cost will depend on various factors and would need to be determined through a detailed budgeting process.

The strength of evidence for this abstract is 7 out of 10.
The evidence in the abstract is fairly strong, but there are some areas for improvement. The study design includes two survey methods, which adds to the robustness of the findings. The sample size is not mentioned, which could affect the generalizability of the results. Additionally, the abstract does not provide information on the statistical significance of the associations found. To improve the evidence, the authors could include the sample size and provide p-values for the associations.

Objective: Community based evidence on pregnancy outcomes in rural Africa is lacking yet it is needed to guide maternal and child health interventions. We estimated and compared adverse pregnancy outcomes and associated factors in rural south-western Uganda using two survey methods. Methods: Within a general population cohort, between 1996 and 2013, women aged 15-49 years were interviewed on their pregnancy outcome in the past 12 months (method 1). During 2012-13, women in the same cohort were interviewed on their lifetime experience of pregnancy outcomes (method 2). Adverse pregnancy outcome was defined as abortions or stillbirths. We used random effects logistic regression for method 1 and negative binomial regression with robust clustered standard errors for method 2 to explore factors associated with adverse outcome. Results: One third of women reported an adverse pregnancy outcome; 10.8 % (abortion = 8.4 %, stillbirth = 2.4 %) by method 1 and 8.5 % (abortion = 7.2 %, stillbirth = 1.3 %) by method 2. Abortion rates were similar (10.8 vs 10.5) per 1000 women and stillbirth rates differed (26.2 vs 13.8) per 1000 births by methods 1 and 2 respectively. Abortion risk increased with age of mother, non-attendance of antenatal care and proximity to the road. Lifetime stillbirth risk increased with age. Abortion and stillbirth risk reduced with increasing parity. Discussion: Both methods had a high level of agreement in estimating abortion rate but were markedly below national estimates. Stillbirth rate estimated by method 1 was double that estimated by method 2 but method 1 estimate was more consistent with the national estimates. Conclusion: Strategies to improve prospective community level data collection to reduce reporting biases are needed to guide maternal health interventions.

Data for this analysis are from the General Population Cohort (GPC) in Uganda. The study site is located 120 km west of the capital city, Kampala, in a rural community where demographic surveillance and medical surveys have been conducted since 1989 as described in detail elsewhere [13]. The GPC is a community-based open cohort study with approximately 22,000 residents of 25 neighbouring villages. The cohort was initially established by the UK Medical Research Council in collaboration with the Uganda Virus Research Institute to study the population dynamics of HIV transmission in rural Uganda, and now provides a platform to investigate determinants of other diseases, and health related problems focusing on maternal and child health. Agriculture is the main economic activity with rain-fed, small-holder farms for growing mainly bananas, coffee, beans, groundnuts, vegetables and a few root crops such as cassava and potatoes mainly for subsistence. Levels of education are generally low with about one third of the population attaining secondary education. Five health facilities serve the population with basic medical care, three of which offer family planning, antenatal care and deliveries. One higher level centre within the study area and a hospital 20 km away from the study area offer emergency obstetric services. An annual household survey of GPC residents has been conducted since 1989, with all study village residents eligible for inclusion. Community sensitization activities precede each survey round, including local council briefings and village meetings. All households are visited by, in turn, the mapping, census and survey teams. All consenting adult residents are interviewed at home in the local language by trained survey staff and provide a blood sample for HIV testing. In selected medical surveys between 1996 and 2013, all women aged 15–49 years who had been pregnant in the last 12 months were asked specifically about the outcome of their pregnancy. In 2012–2013, additional data on life time experience of pregnancies (total number, and outcome) were collected to compare with the annual interviews (see questions in Additional file 1). The World Health Organization (WHO) has defined stillbirth as foetal death late in pregnancy deferring the gestational age (GA) when a miscarriage (abortion) becomes a stillbirth to country policy [14]. In Uganda the GA cut-off for abortion and stillbirth is 28 weeks. In this paper we therefore define Abortion as a foetal loss before 28 weeks of gestation and stillbirth as a baby born with no signs of life after 28 completed weeks of gestation. Abortion rate is the number of abortions per 1,000 women of childbearing age and Stillbirth rate is the number of stillbirths per 1000 births. In this paper no distinction is made between spontaneous and induced abortions because induced abortion is illegal in Uganda and is highly stigmatized in rural communities. Adverse pregnancy outcome is defined as a pregnancy that did not result in a livebirth (this included both abortions and stillbirths). Age Specific Fertility Rate (ASFR) is the number of births per 1000 women in a particular age group. It is normally calculated for 5-year age groups over the reproductive ages, which are taken as 15–49 years. We also used Total Fertility Rate (TFR) referring to the number of live births that a woman would have had if she were subject to the current ASFR throughout the reproductive ages (15–49 years). Data were initially collected on paper and double entered in Microsoft Office Access, until 2009 when electronic data capture was introduced. The program contained logic programming skips and verifications that disallowed conflicting data. Stata 13 (Stata Corporation, College Station, USA) and SAS 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA) were used for analysis. Baseline characteristics were tabulated by study round (roughly corresponding to calendar year). Analysis of pregnancy outcomes in the past 12 months (live birth, stillbirth, abortion) and rates were examined by study round. We explored factors associated with abortion and with stillbirth in all study rounds as separate outcomes, and estimated odds ratios (OR) and 95 % CI for the associations using random effects logistic regression to account for clustering within women who reported more than one pregnancy. Age was included in all models as an a priori confounder. For abortions, factors whose age-adjusted association was significant at p < 0.10 were included in a multivariable model, and retained if they remained associated at p < 0.10. Because the numbers of stillbirths were small, we did not attempt to build a full multivariable model for this outcome. We also analysed pregnancy outcomes based on lifetime experience of pregnancies; computed for those who reported at least one pregnancy, the number and proportion of pregnancies ending as livebirth, abortion and stillbirth and summarised the results by age, marital status, religion education occupation, residence, phone ownership and parity. The proportion of women in the reproductive age reporting live births, stillbirths and abortions was also determined. We examined risk factors for abortions and stillbirths, as separate outcomes; the number of these events was considered as count outcome. Negative binomial regression was used to examine the effect of various risk factors on the number of abortions and stillbirths because the data were over-dispersed (variance greater than the mean); robust clustered standard errors were used to account for correlation of repeated pregnancies among women. The logarithm of the total number of pregnancies for each woman was included in the model as an offset. As with the analysis of outcomes in each round, age was considered an a priori confounder and included in all models. Factors whose age-adjusted association with the outcome was significant at p < 0.10 were included in a multivariable model and retained if they remained associated at p < 0.10. Lastly, we compared the results of two survey approaches; annual surveys between 1996 and 2013, when women were interviewed on their pregnancy experience in the preceding 12 months, versus the single survey in 2012–2013 when women were interviewed on their complete obstetric histories. This was done to evaluate the methodological biases associated with each approach. The study was approved by Uganda Virus Research Institute Research and Ethics Committee and the Uganda National Council for Science and Technology. All participants were given detailed study information before a written informed consent was obtained from them.

Based on the provided information, here are some potential innovations that could be used to improve access to maternal health:

1. Mobile Health (mHealth) Solutions: Develop and implement mobile applications or SMS-based systems to provide pregnant women with information and reminders about antenatal care visits, nutrition, and other important aspects of maternal health.

2. Telemedicine: Establish telemedicine services to enable pregnant women in rural areas to consult with healthcare providers remotely, reducing the need for travel and improving access to medical advice and support.

3. Community Health Workers: Train and deploy community health workers in rural areas to provide education, counseling, and basic healthcare services to pregnant women, including antenatal care and postnatal care.

4. Transport Solutions: Develop transportation systems or partnerships to ensure that pregnant women in remote areas have access to timely and safe transportation to healthcare facilities for antenatal care visits, delivery, and emergency obstetric services.

5. Maternal Health Clinics: Establish dedicated maternal health clinics in rural areas, equipped with skilled healthcare providers and necessary equipment, to provide comprehensive antenatal care, delivery services, and postnatal care closer to where women live.

6. Health Education Programs: Implement community-based health education programs to raise awareness about the importance of antenatal care, nutrition, and safe delivery practices, and to address cultural beliefs and practices that may hinder access to maternal healthcare.

7. Financial Support: Develop innovative financing mechanisms, such as microinsurance or conditional cash transfer programs, to help pregnant women in rural areas afford the costs associated with accessing maternal healthcare services.

8. Partnerships and Collaboration: Foster partnerships between government agencies, non-governmental organizations, and private sector entities to pool resources, expertise, and infrastructure to improve access to maternal health services in rural areas.

These are just a few potential innovations that could be considered to improve access to maternal health based on the provided information. The specific context and needs of the rural community in Uganda should be taken into account when designing and implementing these innovations.
AI Innovations Description
Based on the information provided, the recommendation to improve access to maternal health in rural Uganda is to implement strategies for prospective community-level data collection. This will help reduce reporting biases and provide accurate information to guide maternal health interventions.

Some specific strategies that can be considered include:

1. Strengthening community sensitization activities: Conduct regular briefings and meetings with local councils and village residents to raise awareness about the importance of reporting pregnancy outcomes accurately. This can help overcome cultural barriers and stigmas associated with discussing adverse pregnancy outcomes.

2. Training and capacity building: Provide training to survey staff on effective data collection techniques, including how to ask sensitive questions and ensure confidentiality. This will help improve the quality of data collected and reduce reporting biases.

3. Utilizing electronic data capture: Transition from paper-based data collection to electronic data capture systems. This will streamline data entry processes, minimize errors, and improve data management and analysis.

4. Collaboration with local health facilities: Work closely with local health facilities to ensure that accurate and timely information on pregnancy outcomes is shared between the community and healthcare providers. This can help identify and address any discrepancies in reporting.

5. Regular monitoring and evaluation: Establish a system for ongoing monitoring and evaluation of data collection processes to identify any challenges or areas for improvement. This will help ensure the effectiveness of the strategies implemented and enable timely adjustments if needed.

By implementing these recommendations, it will be possible to improve the accuracy and reliability of data on maternal health outcomes in rural Uganda. This, in turn, will help inform evidence-based interventions and policies to improve access to maternal health services and reduce adverse pregnancy outcomes.
AI Innovations Methodology
Based on the provided information, here are some potential recommendations for improving access to maternal health:

1. Strengthen Community-Based Data Collection: Implement strategies to improve prospective community-level data collection to reduce reporting biases. This could involve training community health workers to collect accurate and reliable data on pregnancy outcomes in rural areas.

2. Increase Access to Antenatal Care: Develop initiatives to improve antenatal care attendance among pregnant women, particularly in rural areas. This could include mobile clinics, transportation support, and community outreach programs to educate women about the importance of antenatal care.

3. Improve Road Infrastructure: Enhance road infrastructure in rural areas to improve access to healthcare facilities. This could involve building or upgrading roads to ensure that pregnant women can reach health facilities in a timely manner, especially during emergencies.

4. Expand Emergency Obstetric Services: Increase the availability of emergency obstetric services in rural areas. This could involve establishing more higher-level centers and hospitals that can provide comprehensive obstetric care, including emergency interventions.

To simulate the impact of these recommendations on improving access to maternal health, a methodology could be developed as follows:

1. Define Outcome Measures: Identify specific outcome measures to assess the impact of the recommendations, such as the percentage of women receiving antenatal care, the percentage of women delivering in healthcare facilities, and the maternal mortality rate.

2. Collect Baseline Data: Gather baseline data on the current status of maternal health access in the target area. This could involve conducting surveys, interviews, and reviewing existing data sources.

3. Implement Interventions: Implement the recommended interventions, such as strengthening community-based data collection, increasing access to antenatal care, improving road infrastructure, and expanding emergency obstetric services.

4. Monitor and Evaluate: Continuously monitor and evaluate the implementation of the interventions. This could involve tracking the number of women accessing antenatal care, the number of deliveries in healthcare facilities, and the occurrence of adverse maternal outcomes.

5. Analyze Data: Analyze the collected data to assess the impact of the interventions on improving access to maternal health. This could involve comparing the baseline data with the post-intervention data to identify any changes or improvements.

6. Adjust and Refine: Based on the analysis of the data, make any necessary adjustments or refinements to the interventions. This could involve scaling up successful interventions, addressing any challenges or barriers identified, and continuously improving the strategies to maximize impact.

By following this methodology, it would be possible to simulate the impact of the recommendations on improving access to maternal health and make evidence-based decisions on how to further enhance maternal health services in rural areas.

Share this:
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
WhatsApp
Email