Methods
We conducted a cohort study using anonymised hospital records of pregnant women (>20 weeks of gestation) who underwent delivery in five government medical colleges and hospitals in Assam: Gauhati Medical College and Hospital (GMCH), Guwahati; Assam Medical College and Hospital (AMCH), Dibrugarh; Silchar Medical College and Hospital, Silchar; Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed Medical College and Hospital (FAAMCH), Barpeta; and Jorhat Medical College and Hospital, Jorhat. This study was part of a pilot study conducted to assess the feasibility of establishing an Indian obstetric surveillance and research system in the state of Assam (IndOSS-Assam). Details of the feasibility study are described separately.15 This retrospective study was undertaken to establish the feasibility of using routine medical records for future prospective epidemiological studies linked to the surveillance system.
A data collection form adapted from the Indian Demographic and Health Survey questionnaire and UK Obstetric Surveillance System16 was used to collect anonymous information from the hospital and antenatal records of pregnant women. Data were collected sequentially from the five study sites, for 1 month per site, over a period of 6 months (January–June 2015) to include an average of 200 women per site for an even distribution of the required sample. All women admitted to the postnatal ward of the hospital during the study month were included (until the sample size of 200 was reached) and data were collected from their hospital records by field staff from the Regional Resource Centre, Guwahati, Assam.
The primary exposure for this cohort study was maternal iron deficiency anaemia defined using the WHO criteria for moderate anaemia (pregnant women with an Hb level of 7–9.9 g/dL) and severe anaemia (Hb level <7 g/dL).17 The other exposures, malaria, UTI, helminthic infections and induction of labour, were recorded on the basis of reported diagnoses by clinicians from the women's hospital and antenatal records. The primary outcomes of interest were: (1) primary PPH defined as pregnant women of 20 weeks gestation or more identified as having a blood loss of 500 mL or more from the genital tract within 24 h of birth of a baby18 and (2) low birthweight defined as weight at birth of <2500 g. In addition, we examined two other secondary infant outcomes: small-for-gestational age babies and perinatal death which included stillbirths and neonatal deaths within the first week of life.
The hospital notes did not have information on Hb levels recorded at different gestational periods for each woman. Therefore, we included most recently recorded antenatal Hb concentration and noted the gestational age at which it was recorded. We tested the continuous variable ‘haemoglobin level’ for deviations from linearity. Fitting fractional polynomials showed the presence of a non-linear relationship of Hb level with the outcomes PPH, low birthweight and small-for-gestational age babies. We therefore categorised pregnant women into three groups: mild anaemia/normal Hb, moderate anaemia and severe anaemia.
Gender-specific z-scores and centiles for birthweight-for-gestational age were generated using the INTERGROWTH-21st tool19 for all singleton pregnancies. Infants below the 10th centile or with a z-score <−1.28 were grouped as small-for-gestational age.
We also collected information on known confounders and risk factors for maternal and infant morbidity and mortality including sociodemographic factors such as maternal age, body mass index (BMI), caste (social class), religion, residence, below poverty line status, women's employment status, husband's occupational status and whether he was a tea garden worker; pregnancy-related factors such as parity, previous caesarean section, interpregnancy interval, previous pregnancy problems, pre-existing medical problems, multiple pregnancies, number of antenatal visits, whether folic acid tablets were received and mode of delivery. BMI was calculated from the earliest available information on weight and height of pregnant women measured during the antenatal period, but we do not know the exact time point at which it was measured.
Study power and sample
India is reported to have a high incidence of PPH;8 therefore, a risk of 16% was used for estimating the sample size. For the outcome low birthweight, the reported overall incidence of 37.3% in the state20 was used for the purpose of sample size calculation. Assuming an effect size for the risk ratio to be 1.5, power as 80%, α 5%, and ratio of unexposed to exposed 2, for the above proportions of risk in the unexposed group, we estimated a sample of 230 in the exposed group for the outcome PPH and 70 in the exposed group for low birth weight. These estimates were inflated to account for cluster sampling and possible missing information to give a final estimated sample size of 980.
Statistical analyses
We conducted an initial descriptive analysis to compare the distribution of the confounders and other risk factors across the three exposure groups and univariable analyses to examine the crude ORs for the association between exposure and outcomes. We conducted explanatory multivariable logistic regression analyses using separate models to investigate the associations of maternal anaemia with PPH, low birthweight, small-for-gestational age babies and perinatal death.
We conducted tests for interaction by fitting interaction terms for maternal anaemia and infections during pregnancy for the outcomes PPH, low birthweight and small-for-gestational age babies, and maternal anaemia and induction of labour for PPH followed by likelihood ratio tests. We found significant interaction between these variables; therefore, dummy variables were generated to ascertain the effects of these interactions on the outcomes in separate multivariable logistic regression analyses.
Tests for correlation between the independent variables showed a high correlation between parity and the interpregnancy interval; this variable was therefore not included in the multivariable model. We also found a significant correlation between husbands’ employment status and below poverty line household, as well as between husbands’ employment status and that of the tea garden worker; thus, husbands’ employment status was excluded to improve model parsimony. The final multivariable models therefore adjusted for the following risk factors: caste, religion, residence, below poverty line status, women's employment status, tea garden worker, parity, BMI, maternal age, previous caesarean section, previous pregnancy problems, placental problems in index pregnancy, pre-existing medical problems, multiple pregnancies, number of antenatal visits, whether folic acid tablets were received, and mode of delivery. Mode of delivery was not included in the infant outcomes model as this is not likely to be causally associated.
A substantial proportion of the data was missing for BMI, parity, previous pregnancy problems and below poverty line status. We did not assume the data to be missing at random and generated proxy variables with missing as a separate group for all variables. However, we also conducted complete case analysis for all outcomes and sensitivity analyses by redistributing the missing observations into the different categories of the variables. The results of complete case analyses and sensitivity analyses did not materially differ from that of the main models other than to widen the 95% CI, except for small-for-gestational age for which results could not be obtained as the dependent variable did not vary within the severe anaemia group in complete case analysis (see online supplementary table S1).
On the basis of the sampling frame, clustering of data was at the level of the tertiary hospital which caters to the population within a definite geographical boundary. We did not consider the intraclass correlation coefficient to be high because the geographical areas that the five tertiary hospitals serve are large with a heterogeneous population. Further, the sampling used a single stage cluster design with five large clusters; thus, we employed the Hubert-White robust SEs method to account for any clustering effect. All associations were considered to be significant at a p value of <0.05 (two tailed) and all analyses were performed using Stata V.13.1, SE (StataCorp, College Station, Texas, USA).