Abstract
Objective We compare validation characteristics of four early warning systems for maternal morbidity.
Study Design We used a retrospective cohort of severe maternal morbidity cases between January 2016 and December 2016 compared with a cohort of controls. We determined if the modified early obstetric warning score (MEOWS), maternal early recognition criteria (MERC), modified early warning system (MEWS), or maternal early warning trigger (MEWT) would have alerted. We developed criteria to determine which of these alerts was considered clinically “relevant.”
Results We reviewed 79 morbidity cases and 123 controls. MEOWS and MERC were more sensitive than MEWS or MEWT (67.1 and 67.1% vs. 19% and 40.5%, p < 0.001); however, MEWT and MEWS were more specific (88.6% MEWT and 93.5% MEWS vs. 51.2% MEOWS and 60.2% MERC, p < 0.001). In the control population, 70% of MEWT alerts still appeared “relevant” to the clinical scenario in contrast to the MEOWS (32%) or MERC systems (31%).
Conclusion There are limited comparative data regarding how early warning systems perform in an American population for maternal morbidity. None of the systems performs with high sensitivity and specificity. High-volume, high-acuity units may decide that the lower sensitivity of the MEWT is relatively acceptable when considering the high false trigger rate of the other more sensitive systems. In addition, triggers in the MEWT system were more likely to be clinically relevant even in cases that did not have severe morbidity.
Keywords
maternal early warning system - modified early obstetric warning score - maternal early recognition criteria - modified early warning system - maternal early warning trigger - maternal morbidity
