Validation study of uterine rupture registration in the Medical Birth Registry of Norway

Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica

Volumn 92, Issue 9, 2013, Pages 1086-1093

  Al Zirqi, Iqbal ^a   Stray Pedersen, Babill ^a,b   Forsén, Lisa ^a,c   Kjersti Daltveit, Anne ^c,d   Vangen, Siri ^a  

^a OSLO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

^c NORWEGIAN INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (Norway)

^d UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN   (Norway)

Author keywords

Incidence; positive predictive value; registration; sensitivity; uterine rupture; validation

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DISEASE REGISTRY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INCIDENCE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MATERNAL CARE; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MEDICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; MULTICENTER STUDY; NORWAY; PATIENT ADMINISTRATION SYSTEM; PATIENT CODING; POPULATION BASED CASE CONTROL STUDY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK FACTOR; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERUS RUPTURE; VALIDATION STUDY;

INCIDENCE; POSITIVE PREDICTIVE VALUE; REGISTRATION; SENSITIVITY; UTERINE RUPTURE; VALIDATION;

ADULT; FEMALE; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; LABOR, OBSTETRIC; NORWAY; PARTURITION; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PREGNANCY; REGISTRIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE RUPTURE;

EID: 84882450446     PISSN: 00016349     EISSN: 16000412     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/aogs.12148     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Nahum GG, Pham KQ, Chelmow D,. Uterine Rupture in Pregnancy. Medscape Reference, http://www.emedicine.medscape.com/article/275854-overview (accessed 31 July 2012).
2. Guise JM, McDonagh MS, Osterweil P, Nygren P, Chan BKS, Helfand M,. Systematic review of the incidence and consequences of uterine rupture in women with previous caesarean section. Br Med J. 2004; 329: 19-25.
3. Ofir K, Sheiner E, Levy A, Katz M, Mazor M,. Uterine rupture: risk factors and pregnancy outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003; 189: 1042-6.
4. Yap OW, Kim ES, Laros RK Jr,. Maternal and neonatal outcomes after uterine rupture in labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 184: 1576-81.
5. Zelop C, Heffner LJ,. The downside of cesarean delivery: short- and long-term complications. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2004; 47: 386-93.
6. Al-Zirqi I, Stray-Pedersen B, Forsén L, Vangen S,. Uterine rupture after previous caesarean section. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2010; 117: 809-20.
7. Irgens LM,. The Medical Birth Registry of Norway. Epidemiological research and surveillance throughout 30 years. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2000; 79: 435-9.
8. Melve KK, Lie RT, Skjaerven R, Van Der Hagen CB, Gradek GA, Jonsrud C, et al. Registration of Down syndrome in the Medical Birth Registry of Norway: validity and time trends. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2008; 87: 824-30.
9. Skomsvoll J, Østensen M, Baste V, Irgens L,. Validity of a rheumatic disease diagnosis in the Medical Birth Registry of Norway. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2002; 81: 831-4.
10. Baghestan E, Børdahl PE, Rasmussen SA, Sande AK, Lyslo I, Solvang I,. A validation of the diagnosis of obstetric sphincter tears in two Norwegian databases, the Medical Birth Registry and the Patient Administration System. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2007; 86: 205-9.
11. Rasmussen S, Albrechtsen S, Irgens LM, Dalaker K, Maartmann-Moe H, Vlatkovic L, et al. Unexplained antepartum fetal death in Norway, 1985-97: diagnostic validation and some epidemiologic aspects. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2004; 83: 801-7.
12. Borthen I, Lossius P, Skjaerven R, Bergsjø P,. Changes in frequency and indications for cesarean section in Norway 1967-1984. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1989; 68: 589-93.
13. Directorate of Health and Social Services. The international statistical classification of diseases and related health problems, ICD-10, 10th revision. Used with permission from WHO. Oslo: Norwegian edition, 2005.
14. International Classification of Diseases, ICD-8, 8th revision (1965). http://www.wolfbane.com/icd/icd8 h.htm. (accessed August 15, 2012).
15. International Classification of Diseases, ICD-9, 9th revision (1979). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List-of-ICD-9-codes. (accessed August 15, 2012).
16. Directorate of Health and Social Services. The classification of medical and surgical procedures. Used with permission from the NOMESCO classification of surgical procedures. Oslo: Norwegian edition, 2006.
17. Gardner MJ, Altman DG,. Calculating confidence intervals for proportions and their differences. In:, Gardner MJ, Altman DG, (eds). Statistics with confidence. London: BMJ Publishing Group, 1989. pp. 28-33.
18. Cnattingius S, Ericson A, Gunnarskog J, Källén B,. A quality study of a medical birth registry. Scand J Soc Med. 1990; 18: 143-8.
19. Lain SJ, Roberts CL, Hadfield RM, Bell JC, Morris JM,. How accurate is the reporting of obstetric haemorrhage in hospital discharge data? A validation study. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2008; 48: 481-4.