The Lancet Regional Health - Southeast Asia (Aug 2023)

Adverse birth outcomes among women with ‘low-risk’ pregnancies in India: findings from the Fifth National Family Health Survey, 2019–21Research in context

  • Ajay Tandon,
  • Sanam Roder-DeWan,
  • Mickey Chopra,
  • Sheena Chhabra,
  • Kevin Croke,
  • Marion Cros,
  • Rifat Hasan,
  • Guru Rajesh Jammy,
  • Navneet Manchanda,
  • Amith Nagaraj,
  • Rahul Pandey,
  • Elina Pradhan,
  • Andrew Sunil Rajkumar,
  • Michael A. Peters,
  • Margaret E. Kruk

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 15
p. 100253

Abstract

Read online

Summary: Background: Despite substantial progress in improving maternal and newborn health, India continues to experience high rates of newborn mortality and stillbirths. One reason may be that many births happen in health facilities that lack advanced services—such as Caesarean section, blood transfusion, or newborn intensive care. Stratification based on pregnancy risk factors is used to guide ‘high-risk’ women to advanced facilities. To assess the utility of risk stratification for guiding the choice of facility, we estimated the frequency of adverse newborn outcomes among women classified as ‘low risk’ in India. Methods: We used the 2019–21 Fifth National Family Health Survey (NFHS-5)—India’s Demographic and Health Survey—which includes modules administered to women aged 15–49 years. In addition to pregnancy history and outcomes, the survey collected a range of risk factors, including biomarkers. We used national obstetric risk guidelines to classify women as ‘high risk’ versus ‘low risk’ and assessed the frequency of stillbirths, newborn deaths, and unplanned Caesarean sections for the respondent’s last pregnancy lasting 7 or more months in the past five years. We calculated the proportion of deliveries occurring at non-hospital facilities in all the Indian states. Findings: Using data from nearly 176,699 recent pregnancies, we found that 46.6% of India’s newborn deaths and 56.3% of stillbirths were among women who were ‘low risk’ according to national guidelines. Women classified as ‘low risk’ had a Caesarean section rate of 8.4% (95% CI 8.1–8.7%), marginally lower than the national average of 10.0% (95% CI 9.8–10.3%). In India as a whole, 32.0% (95% CI 31.5–32.5%) of deliveries occurred in facilities that were likely to lack advanced services. There was substantial variation across the country, with less than 5% non-hospital public facility deliveries in Punjab, Kerala, and Delhi compared to more than 40% in Odisha, Madhya Pradesh, and Rajasthan. Newborn mortality tended to be lower in states with highest hospital delivery rates. Interpretation: Individual risk stratification based on factors identified in pregnancy fails to accurately predict which women will have delivery complications and experience stillbirth and newborn death in India. Thus a determination of ‘low risk’ should not be used to guide women to health facilities lacking key life saving services, including Caesarean section, blood transfusion, and advanced newborn resuscitation and care. Funding: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Bank. The findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed in the paper are entirely those of the authors, and do not represent the views of the Gates Foundation or of the World Bank, its Executive Directors, or the countries they represent.

Keywords