Monitoring quality of obstetric care from hospital discharge databases: A Delphi survey to propose a new set of indicators based on maternal health outcomes

Abstract

Objectives Most indicators proposed for assessing quality of care in obstetrics are process indicators and do not directly measure health effects, and cannot always be identified from routinely available databases. Our objective was to propose a set of indicators to assess the quality of hospital obstetric care from maternal morbidity outcomes identifiable in permanent hospital discharge databases. Methods Various maternal morbidity outcomes potentially reflecting quality of obstetric care were first selected from a systematic literature review. Then a three-round Delphi consensus survey was conducted online from 11/2016 through 02/2017 among a French panel of 37 expert obstetricians, anesthetists-critical-care specialists, midwives, quality-of-care researchers, and user representatives. For a given maternal outcome, several definitions could be proposed and the indicator (i.e. corresponding rate) could be applied to all women or restricted to specific subgroup(s). Results Of the 49 experts invited to participate, 37 agreed. The response rate was 92% in the second round and 97% in the third. Finally, a set of 13 indicators was selected to assess the quality of hospital obstetric care: rates of uterine rupture, postpartum hemorrhage, transfusion incident, severe perineal lacerations, episiotomy, cesarean, cesarean under general anesthesia, post-cesarean site infection, anesthesia-related complications, postpartum pulmonary embolism, maternal readmission and maternal mortality. Six were considered in specific subgroups, with, for example, the postpartum hemorrhage rate assessed among all women and also among women at low risk of PPH. Implications This Delphi process enabled us to define consensually a set of indicators to assess the quality of hospital obstetrics care from routine hospital data, based on maternal morbidity outcomes. Considering 6 of them in specific subgroups of women is especially interesting. These indicators, identifiable through codes used in international classifications, will be useful to monitor quality of care over time and across settings.

Variations in use of childbirth interventions in 13 high-income countries: A multinational cross-sectional study

“…It is known that maternal mortality is underreported, that definitions differ across countries, and that in some countries, separate registers exist to record maternal mortality and many national registers do not register maternal mortality until 42 days [21,22]. Previous studies recommended that increased attention should be paid to registering maternal morbidity more accurately [23,24]. In addition, low incidences of Apgar score < 7 in Malta and Chile and PPH in Malta may be a result of underreporting [25,26].…”

Resilience and vulnerability of maternity services in Zimbabwe: a comparative analysis of the effect of Covid-19 and lockdown control measures on maternal and perinatal outcomes, a single-centre cross-sectional study at Mpilo Central Hospital

“…There is no global consensus on which maternal and perinatal indicators should be chosen to represent quality and outcomes of maternity care [16], these indicators were chosen to reflect and correspond with a number of reviews on the topic [16][17][18], as well as to fit data that is routinely recorded and available at Mpilo.…”

Contributors to disparities in postpartum readmission rates between safety‐net and non‐safety‐net hospitals: A decomposition analysis

“…Furthermore, with respect to the quality of care, we found that the HCAHPS measures either fell out of our model or if included, did not explain a statistically significant proportion of the SNH/non‐SNH disparity in postpartum readmissions. More proximal measures of obstetric care quality are needed 38–40 …”