Norwegian PUQE (Pregnancy-Unique Quantification of Emesis and nausea) identifies patients with hyperemesis gravidarum and poor nutritional intake: a prospective cohort validation study

Elisabeth Birkeland, Guro Stokke, Randi J Tangvik, Erik A Torkildsen, Jane Boateng, Anne L Wollen, Susanne Albrechtsen, Hans Flaatten, Jone Trovik, Elisabeth Birkeland, Guro Stokke, Randi J Tangvik, Erik A Torkildsen, Jane Boateng, Anne L Wollen, Susanne Albrechtsen, Hans Flaatten, Jone Trovik

Abstract

Objective: The English questionnaire Pregnancy-Unique Quantification of Emesis and nausea (PUQE) identifies women with severe Hyperemesis Gravidarum. Our aim was to investigate whether scores from the translated Norwegian version; SUKK (SvangerskapsUtløst Kvalme Kvantifisering) was associated with severity of hyperemesis and nutritional intake.

Design: A prospective cohort validation study.

Setting: Hospital cohort of Hyperemesis Gravidarum (HG) patients from western Norway and healthy pregnant women from Bergen, Norway.

Sample: 38 women hospitalized due to HG and 31 healthy pregnant controls attending routine antenatal check-up at health centers.

Methods: Data were collected May 2013-January 2014. The study participants answered the Norwegian PUQE-questionnaire (scores ranging from 3 to 15) and registered prospectively 24-hours nutritional intake by a food list form.

Main outcome measures: Differences of PUQE-scores, QOL-score and nutritional intake between hyperemesis patients and controls.

Results: Hyperemesis patients had shorter gestational age compared to controls (median 9.7 weeks; 95% CI 8.6-10.6 versus 11.9; 95% CI 10.1-12.9, p=0.004), and larger weight-change from pre-pregnant weight (loss of median 3 kg; 95% CI 3-4 versus gain of 2 kg; 95% CI 0.5-2, p<0.001) otherwise groups were similar regarding pre-pregnant BMI, age, gravidity, and inclusion weight. Compared to controls, hyperemesis patients had significant higher PUQE-score (median 13; 95% CI 11-14 vs. 7; 95% CI 4-8), lower QOL (median score 3; 95% CI 2-4 vs. 6; 95% CI 4.5-8) and lower nutritional intake (energy intake median 990 kcal/24 hours; 95% CI 709-1233 vs. 1652; 95% CI 1558-1880 all p<0.001). PUQE-score was inversely correlated to nutritional intake (-0.5, p<0.001). At discharge PUQE-score had fallen to median 6 (95% CI 5-8) and QOL score risen to 7 (95% CI 6-8) in the HG group, (both p<0.001 compared to admission values).

Conclusion: PUQE-scoring has been validated as a robust indicator of severe hyperemesis gravidarum and insufficient nutritional intake in a Norwegian setting.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interest exist.

Figures

Fig 1. PUQE-24*-questionnaire used in prospective cohort…
Fig 1. PUQE-24*-questionnaire used in prospective cohort validation study of HG^ versus healthy pregnant women.
*Pregnancy-Unique Quantification of Emesis and nausea. ^Hyperemesis Gravidarum.
Fig 2. Outline of enrolment in prospective…
Fig 2. Outline of enrolment in prospective cohort study validating Norwegian PUQE-24* in HG^ patients (n = 38) and healthy pregnant women (n = 31).
*Pregnancy-Unique Quantification of Emesis and nausea. ^Hyperemesis Gravidarum.
Fig 3. PUQE-24*-score in HG^ patients (n…
Fig 3. PUQE-24*-score in HG^ patients (n = 38) at admission, healthy pregnant women (n = 31) and HG^ patients (n = 35) at discharge.
*Pregnancy-Unique Quantification of Emesis and nausea. ^Hyperemesis Gravidarum.
Fig 4. PUQE-24*-score in relation to gestational…
Fig 4. PUQE-24*-score in relation to gestational length for HG^ patients (n = 38) and controls (n = 31).
*Pregnancy-Unique Quantification of Emesis and nausea. ^Hyperemesis Gravidarum.

References

    1. Chortatos A, Haugen M, Iversen P, Vikanes A, Magnus P, Veirod M. Nausea and vomiting in pregnancy: associations with maternal gestational diet and lifestyle factors in the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study. BJOG. 2013;13: 1642–1653. 10.1111/1471-0528.12406
    1. Power Z, Thomson AM, Waterman H. Understanding the stigma of hyperemesis gravidarum: qualitative findings from an action research study. Birth. 2010;37: 237–244. 10.1111/j.1523-536X.2010.00411.x
    1. Verberg MF, Gillott DJ, Al-Fardan N, Grudzinskas JG. Hyperemesis gravidarum, a literature review. Hum Reprod Update. 2005;11: 527–539.
    1. Fairweather DV. Nausea and vomiting in pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1968;102: 135–175.
    1. Vandraas K, Vikanes A, Vangen S, Magnus P, Stoer N, Grjibovski A. Hyperemesis gravidarum and birth outcomes-a population-based cohort study of 2.2 million births in the Norwegian Birth Registry. BJOG. 2013;13: 1654–1660. 10.1111/1471-0528.12429
    1. Dodds L, Fell DB, Joseph KS, Allen VM, Butler B. Outcomes of pregnancies complicated by hyperemesis gravidarum. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107: 285–292.
    1. Koren G, Boskovic R, Hard M, Maltepe C, Navioz Y, Einarson A. Motherisk-PUQE (pregnancy-unique quantification of emesis and nausea) scoring system for nausea and vomiting of pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;186: S228–231.
    1. Ebrahimi N, Maltepe C, Bournissen FG, Koren G. Nausea and vomiting of pregnancy: using the 24-hour Pregnancy-Unique Quantification of Emesis (PUQE-24) scale. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2009;31: 803–807.
    1. Lacasse A, Rey E, Ferreira E, Morin C, Berard A. Validity of a modified Pregnancy-Unique Quantification of Emesis and Nausea (PUQE) scoring index to assess severity of nausea and vomiting of pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;198: 71 e71–77.
    1. Koren G, Piwko C, Ahn E, Boskovic R, Maltepe C, Einarson A et al. Validation studies of the Pregnancy Unique-Quantification of Emesis (PUQE) scores. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2005;25: 241–244.
    1. Lombardi DG, Istwan NB, Rhea DJ, O'Brien JM, Barton JR. Measuring outpatient outcomes of emesis and nausea management in pregnant women. Manag Care. 2004;13: 48–52.
    1. Maltepe C, Koren G. The management of nausea and vomiting of pregnancy and hyperemesis gravidarum-a 2013 update. J Popul Ther Clin Pharmacol. 2013;20: e184–192.
    1. Wibowo N, Purwosunu Y, Sekizawa A, Farina A, Tambunan V, Bardosono S. Vitamin B(6) supplementation in pregnant women with nausea and vomiting. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2012;116: 206–210. 10.1016/j.ijgo.2011.09.030
    1. Albayrak M, Karatas A, Demiraran Y, Erman H, Topuz S, Biyik I et al. Ghrelin, acylated ghrelin, leptin and PYY-3 levels in hyperemesis gravidarum. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2013;26: 866–870. 10.3109/14767058.2013.766699
    1. Maina A, Arrotta M, Cicogna L, Donvito V, Mischinelli M, Todros T et al. Transdermal clonidine in the treatment of severe hyperemesis. A pilot randomised control trial: CLONEMESI. BJOG. 2014;12: 1556–1562. 10.1111/1471-0528.12757
    1. . Pregnancy Specific Nausea Questionnaire (PUQE) Translated and Tested in Norwegian (PUQE-N). Available: . Accessed 05 February 2015.
    1. Guttormsen A, Hensrud A, Irtun Ø, Mowé M, Sørbye LW, Thoresen L et al. Nasjonale faglige retningslinjer for forebyggende og behandling av underernæring. In: Ernæring HA editor. Oslo: Helsedirektoratet; 2009.
    1. Helsedirektoratet. Anbefalinger om kosthold, ernæring og fysisk aktivitet. Oslo: Helsedirektoratet; 2014.
    1. van Stuijvenberg ME, Schabort I, Labadarios D, Nel JT. The nutritional status and treatment of patients with hyperemesis gravidarum. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995;172: 1585–1591.
    1. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61: 344–349. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.11.008
    1. Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60: 34–42.
    1. Klauser CK, Fox NS, Istwan N, Rhea D, Rebarber A, Desch C et al. Treatment of severe nausea and vomiting of pregnancy with subcutaneous medications. Am J Perinatol. 2011;28: 715–721. 10.1055/s-0031-1280594
    1. Boskovic R, Einarson A, Maltepe C, Wolpin J, Koren G. Diclectin therapy for nausea and vomiting of pregnancy: effects of optimal dosing. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2003;25: 830–833.
    1. Meltzer HM, Brantsaeter AL, Ydersbond TA, Alexander J, Haugen M. Methodological challenges when monitoring the diet of pregnant women in a large study: experiences from the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study (MoBa). Matern Child Nutr. 2008;4: 14–27. 10.1111/j.1740-8709.2007.00104.x
    1. Gibson R. Principles of Nutritional Assessment. New York, USA: Oxford University Press; 2005.
    1. Power Z, Campbell M, Kilcoyne P, Kitchener H, Waterman H. The Hyperemesis Impact of Symptoms Questionnaire: development and validation of a clinical tool. Int J Nurs Stud. 2010;47: 67–77. 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.06.012
    1. Stubbs RJ, O'Reilly LM, Whybrow S, Fuller Z, Johnstone AM, Livingstone MB et al. Measuring the difference between actual and reported food intakes in the context of energy balance under laboratory conditions. Br J Nutr. 2014; 1–12.
    1. Latva-Pukkila U, Isolauri E, Laitinen K. Dietary and clinical impacts of nausea and vomiting during pregnancy. J Hum Nutr Diet. 2010;23: 69–77. 10.1111/j.1365-277X.2009.01019.x

Source: PubMed

赞助者和合作者

医疗条件

药物干预

3
订阅