Skip to main content
Log in

Prediction of Maternal Morbidity and Mortality Risk Among Women with Medical Disorders Presenting to Emergency Obstetric care (EMOC): A Prospective Observational Study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstracts

Introduction

Medical disorders complicating pregnancy have recently emerged as the most common cause for maternal morbidity and mortality and it is important to predict mortality risk when they present in moribund state to emergency obstetric care so as to take and timely effective measures to prevent mortality.

Methods

This prospective observational study was conducted over 6 months among pregnant and post-partum women with medical disorders who sought emergency obstetric care at a tertiary care hospital. Severity of morbidity was assessed using SOFA and APACHE II scores at admission.

Results

Of the 128 women, 87.5% were pregnant, and 12.5% were post-partum. Hypertensive disorders, cardiac disorders, neurological disorders and infective disorders were 24.2%, 22.6%, 14% and 9.4%, respectively. The optimal cut-off SOFA score was 2 (AUC = 0.739) with 66% sensitivity and 71% specificity and APACHE II score cut-off was 6 (AUC = 0.732) with a sensitivity of 60% and specificity of 78% in predicting severe maternal morbidity. The median scores of APACHE II and SOFA are 14 and 4, respectively, for non-survivors and for survivors it was 4 and 1.

Conclusion

Hypertensive disorder was the most common medical disorder, but severity was high in cardiac disorder. SOFA and APACHE II scores are good predictors of morbidity and mortality risk.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Narayan B, Nelson-Piercy C. Medical problems in pregnancy. Clin Med. 2017;17(3):251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Mantel GD, Buchmann E, Rees H, et al. Severe acute maternal morbidity: a pilot study of a definition for a near-miss. BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 1998;105(9):985–90.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Ferreira FL, Bota DP, Bross A, et al. Serial evaluation of the SOFA score to predict outcome in critically ill patients. JAMA. 2001;286(14):1754–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP, et al. APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system. Crit Care Med. 1985;13(10):818–29.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Demirkiran O, Dikmen Y, Utku T, et al. Critically ill obstetric patients in the intensive care unit. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2003;12(4):266–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Keizer JL, Zwart JJ, Meerman RH, et al. Obstetric intensive care admissions: a 12-year review in a tertiary care centre. Europ J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2006;128(1–2):152–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Vargas M, Marra A, Buonanno P, et al. Obstetric admissions in ICU in a tertiary care center: a 5-years retrospective study. Indian J Crit Care Med Peer-Rev. 2019;23(5):213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Pattinson RC, Buchmann E, Mantel G, et al. Can enquiries into severe acute maternal morbidity act as a surrogate for maternal death enquiries? BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2003;110(10):889–93.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Parmar NT, Parmar AG, Mazumdar VS. Incidence of maternal “near-miss” events in a tertiary care hospital of central Gujarat, India. J Obstet Gynecol India. 2016;66(1):315–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kumar R, Gupta A, Suri T, et al. Determinants of maternal mortality in a critical care unit: a prospective analysis. Lung India. 2022;39(1):44–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sodhi K, Bansal V, Shrivastava A, et al. Predictors of mortality in critically ill obstetric patients in a tertiary care intensive care unit: a prospective 18 months study. J Obstet Anaesth Crit Care. 2018;8(2):73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Fadiloglu E, Yuksel ND, Unal C, et al. Characteristics of obstetric admissions to intensive care unit: APACHE II, SOFA and the Glasgow coma scale. J Perinat Med. 2019;47(9):947–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Khergade M, Suri J, Bharti R, et al. Obstetric early warning score for prognostication of critically ill obstetric patient. Indian J Crit Care Med Peer-Rev. 2020;24(6):398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Escobar MF, Nasner D, Hurtado CF, et al. Characterization of obstetric patients with sepsis identified by two diagnostic scales at a fourth-level clinic in Colombia. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2018;143(1):71–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Oliveira-Neto AF, Parpinelli MA, Costa ML, et al. Prediction of severe maternal outcome among pregnant and puerperal women in obstetric ICU. Crit Care Med. 2019;47(2):e136-43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Oliveira-Neto A, Parpinelli MA, Cecatti JG, et al. Sequential organ failure assessment score for evaluating organ failure and outcome of severe maternal morbidity in obstetric intensive care. Sci World J. 2012;1:2012.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Roopa P, Verma S, Rai L, et al. “Nearmiss” obstetric events and maternal deaths in a tertiary care hospital: an audit. J Pregnancy. 2013;2013:393758

    Google Scholar 

  18. Norhayati MN, Hazlina NH, Sulaiman Z, et al. Severe maternal morbidity and near misses in tertiary hospitals, Kelantan, Malaysia: a cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health. 2016;16(1):1–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Binda J, Solanki G. Clinical and etiological study of maternal near-miss at a tertiary referral hospital of central India. Indian J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2016;3(1):28–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Siddiqui SA, Soomro N, Hasnain FS. Severe obstetric morbidity and its outcome in patients presenting in a tertiary care hospital of Karachi. JPMA J Pak Med Assoc. 2012;62(3):226.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bhadade R, de Souza R, More A, et al. Maternal outcomes in critically ill obstetrics patients: a unique challenge. Indian J Crit Care Med Peer-Reviewed Off Publ Indian Soc Crit Care Med. 2012;16(1):8.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Jain S, Guleria K, Vaid NB, et al. Predictors and outcome of obstetric admissions to intensive care unit: a comparative study. Indian J Public Health. 2016;60(2):15914.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kamal S, Singh V, Singh S. A study of clinical characteristics and outcome of obstetric patients in intensive care and high dependency unit of a tertiary centre of Jharkhand, India. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2020;9:394–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

The authors thank Dr Simi, Resident in the Department of Preventive and Social Medicine, for her help in statistical analysis.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mecheril Balachandran Divya.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author(s) declared no potential conflict of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Ethical Approval

All data collected after getting approval from institutional ethical committee (JIP/IEC/2021/059).

Human and Animal Rights

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation and with Helsinki Declaration 1975, as revised in 2008.

Informed Consent of Publications

Informed consent was obtained from all women for being included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Mecheril Balachandran Divya (MBBS, MS OBG, PDF Obstetric Medicine) is a Former Senior Resident; Papa Dasari (MD, DGO, FICOG, PDCR) is a Senior Professor.

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

Calculation of apache II score: value range from 0 to 71.

APACHE II Score = Acute physiology score (A) + Glasgow coma score (B) + Chronic health points (C).

A. Acute physiology score

Acute physiology score

    

Normal range

    

Score

4

3

2

1

0

1

2

3

4

Rectal temperature (°C)

 ≥ 41

39–40.9

38.5–38.9

36–38.4

34–35.9

32–33.9

30–31.9

 ≤ 29.9

Mean blood pressure (mmHg)

 ≥ 160

130–159

110–129

70–109

50–69

 ≤ 49

Heart rate

 ≥ 180

140–179

110–139

70–109

55–69

45–54

 ≤ 39

Respiratory rate

 ≥ 50

35–49

25–34

12–24

10–11

6–9

 ≤ 5

Arterial pH

 ≥ 7.7

7.6–7.69

7.5 –7.59

7.33–7.49

7.25–7.32

7.15–7.24

 ≤ 7.15

Oxygenation, PaO2

 ≥ 500

350–499

200–349

 < 200 > 70

61–70

55–60

 < 55

Serum sodium (mEq/L)

 ≥ 180

160–179

155–159

150–154

130–149

120–129

111–119

 ≤ 110

Serum potassium (mEq/L)

 ≥ 7

6–6.9

5.5–5.9

3.5–5.4

3–3.4

2.5–2.9

 < 2.5

Serum creatinine (mg/dL)

 ≥ 3.5

2–3.4

1.5–1.9

0.6–1.4

 < 0.6

Haematocrit (%)

 ≥ 60

50–59.9

46–49.9

30–45.9

20–29.9

 < 20

WBC count (103/ml)

 ≥ 40

20–39.9

15–19.9

3–14.9

1–2.9

 < 1

B. Glasgow coma scale

Eye opening

Verbal non-intubated

Verbal intubated

Motor activity

4 = spontaneous

5—Oriented and talks

5—Seems able to talk

6—Verbal command

3 = verbal stimuli

4—Disoriented and talks

3—Questionable ability to talk

5—Localizes to pain

2 = painful stimuli

3—Inappropriate words

1—Generally unresponsive

4—Withdraws from pain

1 = no response

2—Incomprehensible sounds

 

3—Decorticate

 

1—No response

 

2—Decerebrate

   

1—No response

C. Chronic health points

History of chronic condition

Score

None

0

If elective post-operative patient with immunocompromise or severe organ insufficiency

2

Non-operative patient or emergency post-operative patient with immunocompromise or severe organ insufficiency

5

D. Calculation of SOFA score: value range from 0 to 24

System

Scores

0

1

2

3

4

Respiratory system parameter, PaO2/FiO2 (mmHg)

 ≥ 400

 < 400

 < 300

 < 200

 < 100

Coagulation system Platelets *103/µL

 > 150

 < 150

 < 100

 < 50

 < 20

Hepatobiliary system parameter Bilirubin, mg/dL

 < 1.2

1.2–1.9

2–5.9

6–11.9

 > 12

Cardiovascular parameter

MAP > 70 mmHg

MAP < 70 mmHg

Dopamine < 5 or dobutamine (any dose)

Dopamine 5.1–15 or epinephrine < 0.1 or norepinephrine < 0.1

Dopamine > 15 or Epinephrine > 0.1 or norepinephrine > 0.1

Central nervous system Glasgow coma scale

15

13–14

10–12

6–9

 < 6

Renal parameters creatinine, mg/dL

 < 1.2

1.2–1.9

2–3.4

3.5–4.9

 > 5

Urine output, ml/day

   

 < 500

 < 200

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Divya, M.B., Dasari, P. Prediction of Maternal Morbidity and Mortality Risk Among Women with Medical Disorders Presenting to Emergency Obstetric care (EMOC): A Prospective Observational Study. J Obstet Gynecol India 73, 522–530 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13224-023-01859-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13224-023-01859-4

Keywords

Navigation