The global maternal sepsis study and awareness campaign (GLOSS): study protocol

Mercedes Bonet, Joao Paulo Souza, Edgardo Abalos, Bukola Fawole, Marian Knight, Seni Kouanda, Pisake Lumbiganon, Ashraf Nabhan, Ruta Nadisauskiene, Vanessa Brizuela, A Metin Gülmezoglu, Mercedes Bonet, Joao Paulo Souza, Edgardo Abalos, Bukola Fawole, Marian Knight, Seni Kouanda, Pisake Lumbiganon, Ashraf Nabhan, Ruta Nadisauskiene, Vanessa Brizuela, A Metin Gülmezoglu

Abstract

Background: Maternal sepsis is the underlying cause of 11% of all maternal deaths and a significant contributor to many deaths attributed to other underlying conditions. The effective prevention, early identification and adequate management of maternal and neonatal infections and sepsis can contribute to reducing the burden of infection as an underlying and contributing cause of morbidity and mortality. The objectives of the Global Maternal Sepsis Study (GLOSS) include: the development and validation of identification criteria for possible severe maternal infection and maternal sepsis; assessment of the frequency of use of a core set of practices recommended for prevention, early identification and management of maternal sepsis; further understanding of mother-to-child transmission of bacterial infection; assessment of the level of awareness about maternal and neonatal sepsis among health care providers; and establishment of a network of health care facilities to implement quality improvement strategies for better identification and management of maternal and early neonatal sepsis.

Methods: This is a facility-based, prospective, one-week inception cohort study. This study will be implemented in health care facilities located in pre-specified geographical areas of participating countries across the WHO regions of Africa, Americas, Eastern Mediterranean, Europe, South East Asia, and Western Pacific. During a seven-day period, all women admitted to or already hospitalised in participating facilities with suspected or confirmed infection during any stage of pregnancy through the 42nd day after abortion or childbirth will be included in the study. Included women will be followed during their stay in the facilities until hospital discharge, death or transfer to another health facility. The maximum intra-hospital follow-up period will be 42 days.

Discussion: GLOSS will provide a set of actionable criteria for identification of women with possible severe maternal infection and maternal sepsis. This study will provide data on the frequency of maternal sepsis and uptake of effective diagnostic and therapeutic interventions in obstetrics in different hospitals and countries. We will also be able to explore links between interventions and maternal and perinatal outcomes and identify priority areas for action.

Keywords: Early neonatal sepsis; Infectious pregnancy complication; Maternal sepsis.

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was approved by the World Health Organization Ethical Review Committee on October 02, 2017. This study obtained all required authorizations at country and institutional level, and the relevant consent to participate.

Consent for publication

All authors reviewed the manuscript, and approved the final version for publication.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests. The collaboration between HRP/RHR and Merck for Mothers is governed by a bilateral agreement.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Countries that were invited to participate in the Global Maternal Sepsis Study and Awareness Campaign. Disclaimer: The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the World Health Organization or the Global Maternal Sepsis Study researchers
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Estimated sample size. In grey boxes women to be included in the study.150 geographical areas with 2,000,000 inhabitants, with global birth rate of 19.6 live births per 1000; 2Two million live births per year × mean gestation period (40 weeks/52 weeks of year), not adjusted to account for abortions, miscarriages or stillbirths;3 Includes pregnancy related infection and infections complicating pregnancy, childbirth and the postpartum period (ICD-MM). Regardless of cause of admission (e.g. childbirth) and whether primary or secondary infection (e.g. postoperative, aspiration pneumonia); 4 Based on WHO Multi-country Study 2010–2011 [37]

References

    1. Say L, et al. Global causes of maternal death: a WHO systematic analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2014;2(6):e323–e333. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(14)70227-X.
    1. Souza JP, et al. Moving beyond essential interventions for reduction of maternal mortality (the WHO multicountry survey on maternal and newborn health): a cross-sectional study. Lancet. 2013;381(9879):1747–1755. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60686-8.
    1. Acosta CD, et al. Severe maternal sepsis in the UK, 2011-2012: a national case-control study. PLoS Med. 2014;11(7):e1001672. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001672.
    1. Schutte JM, et al. Rise in maternal mortality in the Netherlands. BJOG. 2010;117(4):399–406. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2009.02382.x.
    1. Lumbiganon P, et al. Indirect causes of severe adverse maternal outcomes: a secondary analysis of the WHO multicountry survey on maternal and newborn health. BJOG. 2014;121(Suppl 1):32–39. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.12647.
    1. Chou D, et al. Constructing maternal morbidity - towards a standard tool to measure and monitor maternal health beyond mortality. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2016;16:45. doi: 10.1186/s12884-015-0789-4.
    1. Kourtis AP, Read JS, Jamieson DJ. Pregnancy and infection. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(23):2211–2218. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1213566.
    1. Chan GJ, et al. Risk of early-onset neonatal infection with maternal infection or colonization: a global systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Med. 2013;10(8):e1001502. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001502.
    1. Cortese F, et al. Early and late infections in newborns: where do we stand? A review. Pediatr Neonatol. 2016;57(4):265–273. doi: 10.1016/j.pedneo.2015.09.007.
    1. Bhutta ZA, et al. Can available interventions end preventable deaths in mothers, newborn babies, and stillbirths, and at what cost? Lancet. 2014;384(9940):347–370. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60792-3.
    1. Acosta CD, Knight M. Sepsis and maternal mortality. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2013;25(2):109–116. doi: 10.1097/GCO.0b013e32835e0e82.
    1. Philibert M, Deneux-Tharaux C, Bouvier-Colle MH. Can excess maternal mortality among women of foreign nationality be explained by suboptimal obstetric care? BJOG. 2008;115(11):1411–1418. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2008.01860.x.
    1. Tuncalp O, et al. Education and severe maternal outcomes in developing countries: a multicountry cross-sectional survey. BJOG. 2014;121(Suppl 1):57–65. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.12634.
    1. Ganchimeg T, et al. Pregnancy and childbirth outcomes among adolescent mothers: a World Health Organization multicountry study. BJOG. 2014;121(Suppl 1):40–48. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.12630.
    1. Singer M, et al. The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (Sepsis-3) JAMA. 2016;315(8):801–810. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.0287.
    1. Seymour CW, et al. Assessment of clinical criteria for sepsis: for the third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (Sepsis-3) JAMA. 2016;315(8):762–774. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.0288.
    1. Shankar-Hari M, et al. Developing a new definition and assessing new clinical criteria for septic shock: for the third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (Sepsis-3) JAMA. 2016;315(8):775–787. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.0289.
    1. Bauer ME, et al. Maternal physiologic parameters in relationship to systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124(3):535–541. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000423.
    1. Oud L. Pregnancy-associated severe sepsis: contemporary state and future challenges. Infect Dis Ther. 2014;3(2):175–189. doi: 10.1007/s40121-014-0037-7.
    1. van Dillen J, et al. Maternal sepsis: epidemiology, etiology and outcome. Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2010;23(3):249–254. doi: 10.1097/QCO.0b013e328339257c.
    1. Dolea C, Stein C. Global burden of maternal sepsis in the year 2000. Evidence and Information for Policy (EIP), World Health Organization; 2003. Avilable at . Accessed 8 Dec 2017.
    1. Bonet M, Nogueira Pileggi V, Rijken MJ, Coomarasamy A, Lissauer D, Souza JP, Gülmezoglu AM, The Global Maternal and Neonatal Sepsis Initiative Working Group, Towards a consensus definition of maternal sepsis: results of a systematic review and expert consultation. Reprod Health. 2017;14(1):67.
    1. WHO, Statement on maternal sepsis. 2016. Available at . Accessed 8 Dec 2017.
    1. Arora KS, et al. Triggers, bundles, protocols, and checklists--what every maternal care provider needs to know. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;214(4):444–451. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2015.10.011.
    1. Edwards SE, et al. Modified obstetric early warning scoring systems (MOEWS): validating the diagnostic performance for severe sepsis in women with chorioamnionitis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;212(4):536.e1–536.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.11.007.
    1. Aarvold AB, et al. Multiple organ dysfunction score is superior to the obstetric-specific sepsis in obstetrics score in predicting mortality in septic obstetric patients. Crit Care Med. 2016;45(1):e49. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002018.
    1. WHO, Monitoring emergency obstetric care: a handbook. 2009. Available at . Accessed 8 Dec 2017.
    1. Vincent JL, et al. The prevalence of nosocomial infection in intensive care units in Europe. Results of the European prevalence of infection in intensive care (EPIC) study. EPIC international advisory committee. JAMA. 1995;274(8):639–644. doi: 10.1001/jama.1995.03530080055041.
    1. Vincent JL, et al. Sepsis in European intensive care units: results of the SOAP study. Crit Care Med. 2006;34(2):344–353. doi: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000194725.48928.3A.
    1. Versporten A, et al. The worldwide antibiotic resistance and prescribing in European children (ARPEC) point prevalence survey: developing hospital-quality indicators of antibiotic prescribing for children. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2016;71(4):1106–1117. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkv418.
    1. Weiss SL, et al. Global epidemiology of pediatric severe sepsis: the sepsis prevalence, outcomes, and therapies study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2015;191(10):1147–1157. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201412-2323OC.
    1. CRITICAL APPRAISAL SKILLS PROGRAMME (CASP): Making Sense of Evidence 12 Questions to Help You Make Sense of a Cohort Study. Accesible at .
    1. Bachmann LM, et al. Sample sizes of studies on diagnostic accuracy: literature survey. BMJ. 2006;332(7550):1127–1129. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38793.637789.2F.
    1. Kho ME, et al. Written informed consent and selection bias in observational studies using medical records: systematic review. BMJ. 2009;338:b866. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b866.
    1. Barton JR, Sibai BM. Severe sepsis and septic shock in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Sep;120(3):689–706.
    1. Albright CM, Ali TN, Lopes V, Rouse DJ, Anderson BL.The Sepsis in Obstetrics Score: a model to identify risk of morbidity from sepsis in pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Jul;211(1):39.e1–8.
    1. Souza JP, Gϋlmezoglu AM, Vogel J, Carroli G, Lumbiganon P, Qureshi Z, Costa MJ, Fawole B, Mugerwa Y, Nafiou I, Neves I, Moving beyond essential interventions for reduction of maternal mortability (the WHO Multicountry Survey on Maternal and Newborn Health): a cross-sectional study. The Lancet. 2013;381(9879):1747–55.

Source: PubMed

3
購読する