ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT01990625Updated Sep 29, 2016

A Cluster-Randomized Trial of Ultrasound Use to Improve Pregnancy Outcomes in Low Income Country Settings

An interventional study of Antenatal Ultrasound Scan in Pregnancy, Eclampsia and Placenta Previa, sponsored by NICHD Global Network for Women's and Children's Health. Completed at 5 sites in 5 countries. Open to female participants aged 12 Years to 55 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2016-09-29.

Sponsored by NICHD Global Network for Women's and Children's Health · Not applicable, Interventional, and Diagnostic

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
45,038
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
12 Years to 55 Years
Sex
Female
01

Study summary

In many low-income countries, the use of ultrasound by medical officers and non-physician health care staff (e.g., midwives) for antenatal identification of high risk pregnancies is a new intervention requiring authoritative investigation. The primary hypothesis to be assessed in this study is that antenatal ultrasound screenings performed by medical officers and non-physician health care staff will significantly reduce a composite outcome consisting of maternal mortality and maternal near miss, stillbirth and neonatal mortality in low-resource settings. Underpinning this hypothesis are two assumptions. The first assumption is that antenatal detection of complicated pregnancies will lead to appropriate referral at the right time for complicated pregnancies to comprehensive emergency obstetric and neonatal care (EmONC) facilities. The second assumption is that ultrasound's introduction will increase antenatal attendance leading to greater rates of institutional delivery. To assess these underlying assumptions beyond the composite end point, this study will investigate the health system impact of compact ultrasound. Secondary outcomes include antenatal attendance rates, institutional delivery rates at basic EmONC facilities, referral rates to comprehensive EmONC facilities, cesarean section rates (both planned and emergent) and an assessment of medical officers and non-physician health care provider ultrasound competence and training quality.

Read the detailed description

The use of ultrasound by physician and non-physician health care staff for antenatal identification of complicated pregnancies is a potentially effective intervention; however, authoritative investigation in many low-resource settings is needed to establish its potential impact. The investigators propose to undertake a multi-country, cluster randomized trial to assess the impact of antenatal ultrasound screening performed by community physician and non-physician health care staff on a composite outcome consisting of maternal mortality and near miss maternal mortality, stillbirth and neonatal mortality in low-resource settings. Underpinning this objective are several assumptions. The first assumption is that ultrasound's introduction will increase antenatal attendance and improved outcomes due to the antenatal care alone, and greater rates of institutional delivery. The second assumption is that ultrasound use will lead to antenatal detection of complicated pregnancies and timely and appropriate referral for complicated pregnancies to comprehensive emergency obstetric and neonatal care (EmONC) facilities. Increases in antenatal care utilization and referral will result in a decrease in a composite outcome including maternal mortality and near miss mortality, stillbirth and neonatal death. Secondary outcomes to be evaluated include antenatal attendance rates, institutional delivery rates at basic EmONC facilities, referral rates to comprehensive EmONC facilities, cesarean section rates (both planned and emergent), an assessment of community physician and non-physician health care provider ultrasound training and competence and the cost-effectiveness of ultrasound in community health facilities. The investigators will also determine causes for non-compliance with recommendations for referral.

In summary, this trial will evaluate whether training antenatal health care providers to perform basic obstetric ultrasonography, and using these trainees to provide routine ultrasounds in primary care clinics and to refer appropriately will improve pregnancy outcomes in low-resource settings.

To assess the impact of ultrasound, the investigators propose to utilize an existing research infrastructure, the Global Network for Women's and Children's Health Research (Global Network), which currently includes 7 sites in 6 countries, India (2), Pakistan, Kenya, Zambia, DRC and Guatemala. The investigators of the Global Network have an ongoing maternal and newborn health registry to document all pregnancies and their outcomes to 6 weeks post-delivery in more than 100 communities. Thus, population-based rates of maternal mortality and morbidity, stillbirth, and neonatal mortality and morbidity, as well as health care utilization, are being obtained. A sub-set of these clusters will be utilized for the ultrasound trial.

RTI International serves as the data coordinating center for the Global Network to help facilitate the design and conduct of the trial, manage the trial related data, and provide statistical analyses of the trial results. GE Healthcare will provide the ultrasound equipment, and will also fund the University of Washington to provide training and technical support on the implementation of ultrasound in community settings. Together, the Global Network with the support of the University of Washington and GE Healthcare will maximize the resources necessary to conduct a definitive trial on the potential impact of ultrasound to reduce maternal and newborn mortality and maternal morbidity in low-resource settings.

02

Conditions studied

  • Pregnancy
  • Eclampsia
  • Placenta Previa
  • Stillbirth
  • Fetal Growth Restriction

Keywords

  • Maternal Near Miss Morbidity
  • Maternal Mortality
  • Neonatal Mortality
  • Gestational Age Dating
  • Pregnancy Complications
  • Ultrasound
  • Stillbirth
03

In context

Eclampsia

76 studies on the registry are indexed under Eclampsia; 13 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 45,038 is above the median of 174 across 37 interventional studies indexed under Eclampsia.

Browse Eclampsia studies →

Lead sponsor

NICHD Global Network for Women's and Children's Health is the lead sponsor of 33 studies on the registry; 3 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
12 Years to 55 Years
Sexes eligible
Female
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Pregnant women who provide consent
  • Resident of study cluster
  • Enrolled/eligible for the Global Network Maternal and Neonatal Health Registry
  • Women >16 weeks gestation at enrollment

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Women who are in labor at time of consent
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Diagnostic
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
45,038 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Ultrasound scan

    The group is pregnant women who reside in an intervention cluster who receive at least one antenatal ultrasound scan during antenatal care during the study time period.

    Device: Antenatal Ultrasound Scan

  • No intervention
    Routine antenatal care

    The group is pregnant women that reside in the control clusters during the study time period. The group received routine antenatal care.

Interventions

  • DeviceAntenatal Ultrasound Scan

    Women in the intervention arm will be provided two ultrasound scans to screen for pregnancy complications.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Composite outcome

    Introduction of ultrasound will decrease the composite outcome of maternal mortality and near miss maternal mortality events and stillbirths plus early neonatal mortality.

    Time frame: Up to 30 months

Secondary outcomes

  1. Rate of Women with Complicated Deliveries at Health Facilities

    Introduction of ultrasound will significantly increase the percentage of women with complicated pregnancies such as twins, breeches, etc. who deliver in a hospital.

    Time frame: Up to 30 months

Other outcomes

  1. Antenatal Care Utilization

    This outcome will be a process measure of antenatal care utilization (including both the proportion of women with any antenatal care and the median number of antenatal care visits.)

    Time frame: Up to 30 months

07

Study locations

5 sites
  • Kinshasa School of Public Health
    Gemena, Equateur, Congo
  • IMSALUD / San Carlos University
    Guatemala City, Guatemala
  • Moi University School of Medicine
    Eldoret, 30100, Kenya
  • The Aga Khan University
    Karachi, Pakistan
  • University Teaching Hospital
    Lusaka, Zambia
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Nathan R, Swanson JO, Marks W, Goldsmith N, Vance C, Sserwanga NB, Swanson D, McClure EM, Franklin H, Mirza W, Mwenechanya M, Muyodi D, Figuero L, Bolamba VL, Goldenberg RL, Pineda IS. Screening obstetric ultrasound training for a 5-country cluster randomized controlled trial. Ultrasound Q. 2014 Dec;30(4):262-6. doi: 10.1097/RUQ.0000000000000096. PubMed 25415862 ↗
  • McClure EM, Nathan RO, Saleem S, Esamai F, Garces A, Chomba E, Tshefu A, Swanson D, Mabeya H, Figuero L, Mirza W, Muyodi D, Franklin H, Lokangaka A, Bidashimwa D, Pasha O, Mwenechanya M, Bose CL, Carlo WA, Hambidge KM, Liechty EA, Krebs N, Wallace DD, Swanson J, Koso-Thomas M, Widmer R, Goldenberg RL. First look: a cluster-randomized trial of ultrasound to improve pregnancy outcomes in low income country settings. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014 Feb 17;14:73. doi: 10.1186/1471-2393-14-73. PubMed 24533878 ↗
  • Bresnahan BW, Vodicka E, Babigumira JB, Malik AM, Yego F, Lokangaka A, Chitah BM, Bauer Z, Chavez H, Moore JL, Garrison LP, Swanson JO, Swanson D, McClure EM, Goldenberg RL, Esamai F, Garces AL, Chomba E, Saleem S, Tshefu A, Bose CL, Bauserman M, Carlo W, Bucher S, Liechty EA, Nathan RO. Cost estimation alongside a multi-regional, multi-country randomized trial of antenatal ultrasound in five low-and-middle-income countries. BMC Public Health. 2021 May 20;21(1):952. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-10750-8. PubMed 34016085 ↗
  • Figueroa L, McClure EM, Swanson J, Nathan R, Garces AL, Moore JL, Krebs NF, Hambidge KM, Bauserman M, Lokangaka A, Tshefu A, Mirza W, Saleem S, Naqvi F, Carlo WA, Chomba E, Liechty EA, Esamai F, Swanson D, Bose CL, Goldenberg RL. Oligohydramnios: a prospective study of fetal, neonatal and maternal outcomes in low-middle income countries. Reprod Health. 2020 Jan 30;17(1):19. doi: 10.1186/s12978-020-0854-y. PubMed 32000798 ↗
  • Bauserman M, Nathan R, Lokangaka A, McClure EM, Moore J, Ishoso D, Tshefu A, Figueroa L, Garces A, Harrison MS, Wallace D, Saleem S, Mirza W, Krebs N, Hambidge M, Carlo W, Chomba E, Miodovnik M, Koso-Thomas M, Liechty EA, Esamai F, Swanson J, Swanson D, Goldenberg RL, Bose C. Polyhydramnios among women in a cluster-randomized trial of ultrasound during prenatal care within five low and low-middle income countries: a secondary analysis of the first look study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2019 Jul 22;19(1):258. doi: 10.1186/s12884-019-2412-6. PubMed 31331296 ↗
  • Franklin HL, Mirza W, Swanson DL, Newman JE, Goldenberg RL, Muyodi D, Figueroa L, Nathan RO, Swanson JO, Goldsmith N, Kanaiza N, Naqvi F, Pineda IS, Lopez-Gomez W, Hamsumonde D, Bolamba VL, Fogleman EV, Saleem S, Esamai F, Liechty EA, Garces AL, Krebs NF, Michael Hambidge K, Chomba E, Mwenechanya M, Carlo WA, Tshefu A, Lokangaka A, Bose CL, Koso-Thomas M, Miodovnik M, McClure EM. Factors influencing referrals for ultrasound-diagnosed complications during prenatal care in five low and middle income countries. Reprod Health. 2018 Dec 12;15(1):204. doi: 10.1186/s12978-018-0647-8. PubMed 30541560 ↗
09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
Not marked actual or estimatedDates not marked actual or estimated

The record gives a start of Apr 2014, a primary completion of Aug 2016 and a completion of Sep 2016. It does not say whether these dates are actual or estimated.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Nov 15, 2013
First posted
Nov 21, 2013
Start
Apr 2014
Primary completionActual
Aug 2016
CompletionActual
Sep 2016
Last update
Sep 29, 2016
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 29, 2016, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT01990625
Lead sponsor
NICHD Global Network for Women's and Children's Health
Collaborators
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, GE Healthcare
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Nov 21, 2013
Start date
Apr 2014
Primary completion
Aug 2016
Completion
Sep 2016
Last update
Sep 29, 2016

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Sep 2016. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion