QUESTION OF THE MONTH August, In the next two slides you will see the perinatal mortality figures during most of the XX Century, as presented by authors with series of more than 100 cases of eclampsia. Unfortunately, some authors present figures for all types of eclampsia, while a few include only ante and intra-partum eclampsia cases. However, since post-partum eclampsia cases fluctuate between 15 and 25 per cent in most series, comparisons are still possible. We have less series for perinatal mortality, because a few early and late publications centered only in maternal mortality. After you examine the data go to slide four.
MORTALIDAD PERINATAL EN LA ECLAMPSIA Fechas intermedias de las series. * Países en vías de desarrollo Series de >100 casos Mortalidad Perinatal Total
MORTALIDAD PERINATAL EN LA ECLAMPSIA Fechas intermedias de cada serie * Países en vías de desarrollo Mortalidad Total (menos Azcárate et al.) Series >100 casos,menos Möller, Mwinyogl Mortalidad Perinatal Total *
HERE ARE SOME OF THE MANY POSSIBLE QUESTIONS Questions for perinatal mortality figures are very similar to those posted for maternal mortality in July. Why such extreme differences between authors and why no obvious progress between early and late XX Century reports? Why, again, no evident influence in some early figures compared with late XX Century reports, in spite of a tremendous increase in cesarean operation rates throughout the years? Some early figures seem definitely lower than other recent ones, in spite of completely different technologies for the care and surveillance of mother and child. Why ? If these data are useless, how else can we judge progress? Return to Main Page