Skip to main content

Fall in stillbirths in UK not due to new protocol?

A new study suggests that the dramatic fall in stillbirths is not due to the adoption of new growth assessement protocols in pregnancy.

In 2015, the Secretary of State for Health in the UK announced a national ambition to halve the rates of stillbirths, neonatal and maternal deaths and brain injuries at birth by 2030, with a 20% reduction by 2020.

The target is well on track to be met.  But what lies behind its success.  It was thought that it was the result of new protocols for assessing the growth of the baby in the womb.

By comparing the growth of the fetus with expected growth for gestational age can indicate if something is going wrong.  For this vital assessment, growth charts are used.  The problem with the older growth charts was that they took no account of heterogeneity in the population.  More accurate growth assessment could save the lives of babies if problems could be detected sufficiently early in pregnancy.

One approach in recent years has been the adoption of a Growth Assessment Protocol.  

The customised growth chart concept was developed initially in Nottingham in the early 1990s. While recognising the importance of growth for fetal well being, it had become increasingly clear that existing growth charts were not useful for clinical assessment in a heterogeneous maternity population.



Since the adoption of the Growth Assessment Protocol, stillbirths have been falling, but to what extent is this due to the new protocol? 

The adoption of the protocol was adopted later in Scotland than in England and Wales, and this has provided a unique opportunity to compare outcomes of the old versus the new protocol. 

In the UK, the promotion of customized centiles has been through a package of care known as the Growth Assessment Protocol (GAP) which trains midwives and healthcare professionals in fetal growth assessment and the use of customized centiles (those that take account of the mix in the population).

Now, a study published in Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology brings into question claims that the fall in stillbirths is due to the new protocol.

By studying more than 11 million singleton pregnancies in UK regions with similar healthcare systems, the study’s investigators demonstrated that the stillbirth rate in Scotland declined faster than in England and Wales between 2010 and 2015, despite a significantly lower uptake of the GAP program in Scotland.

The findings suggest that the reduction in stillbirth rate in England and Wales cannot be attributed solely to the implementation of the GAP program.

The greater decline in the stillbirth rate in Scotland, despite the low uptake of the programme, suggests that other beneficial public health measures common to both systems are responsible. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Prioritising people in nursing care.

There has been in recent years concern that care in the NHS has not been sufficiently 'patient centred', or responsive to the needs of the patient on a case basis. It has been felt in care that it as been the patient who has had to adapt to the regime of care, rather than the other way around. Putting patients at the centre of care means being responsive to their needs and supporting them through the process of health care delivery.  Patients should not become identikit sausages in a production line. The nurses body, the Nursing and Midwifery Council has responded to this challenge with a revised code of practice reflection get changes in health and social care since the previous code was published in 2008. The Code describes the professional standards of practice and behaviour for nurses and midwives. Four themes describe what nurses and midwives are expected to do: prioritise people practise effectively preserve safety, and promote professionalism and trust. The

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

When Finance Drives Destruction

Tackling climate change means stopping the funding of rainforest destruction, says a significant study commissioned by the World Wildlife Fund.  The UK's financial services have provided directly over £8.7 billion to 167 different traders, processors, and buyers of forest-risk commodities (cocoa, rubber, timber, soy, beef, palm oil, pulp & paper) from 2013 to 2021.   With direct and indirect investment,  the figure rises to a staggering £200 bn.  Whilst not all that investment is in destructive projects,  the study concludes there is little transparency on the risk.  Finance is the oil in the economic machine.  But it also drives decisions. We all know the importance of money. We borrow to invest. So much depends on it, such as company pensions.  Do we really know what our pension pots are doing? We invest for the future. But what kind of future? Is all investment good?  Much investment is bad. Investment drives the nature of our economy. It drives our decisions as individuals,