posts: 25368
Data license: CC-BY
This data as json
id | title | slug | type | status | content | archieml | archieml_update_statistics | published_at | updated_at | gdocSuccessorId | authors | excerpt | created_at_in_wordpress | updated_at_in_wordpress | featured_image | formattingOptions | markdown | wpApiSnapshot |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
25368 | Maternal Mortality – Semmelweis | untitled-reusable-block-66 | wp_block | publish | <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>What could be more tragic than a mother losing her life in the moment that she is giving life to her newborn? The visualization shows how common this once was. In Finland – the country in which women today have the lowest risk to die from pregnancy-related causes – we see that during much of the 19th century, maternal mortality hung between 800 and 1,000 deaths for every 100,000 births. In other words, at each birth women faced a 0.9% chance of death. And since women in Finland <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/total-fertility-rate?tab=chart&country=FIN">gave birth to 5 children</a> on average at the time, this meant that the death of mothers was no rare occurrence.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>The visualization also shows how maternal mortality has changed since then. Starting in the second half of the 19th century, the risk of dying during or after pregnancy has declined from 0.9% to 0.003%. Today, giving birth is 300-times safer than just a few generations ago. How was this possible?</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:html --> <iframe style="width: 100%; height: 600px; border: 0px none;" src="https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/maternal-mortality?tab=chart&country=FIN+USA+OWID_WRL" width="300" height="150"></iframe> <!-- /wp:html --> <!-- wp:heading {"level":4} --> <h4>Measurement and progress: The story of Ignaz Semmelweis</h4> <!-- /wp:heading --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>The story of the decline of maternal mortality is a story about scientific research and the importance of measurement. Today medicine makes progress by relying on <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomized_controlled_trial">randomized controlled trials</a> – the history of the decline of maternal mortality started with a kind of controlled trial, one that wasn't planned, but which happened almost accidentally.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>In the mid-19th century, the largest maternity hospital in the world was in Vienna. At the time puerperal sepsis was the most common cause of maternal deaths. This infection of the uterus killed new mothers shortly after childbirth.{ref}Irvine Loudon (1992) – The transformation of maternal mortality. BMJ 1992; 305:1557 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.305.6868.1557 (Published 19 December 1992){/ref} </p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>The Vienna Maternity Hospital was divided into two wings and for some time the doctors had noticed a stark difference between the wings that they were not able to explain. Doctors and medical students were taught in the first wing, while midwives were taught in the second. In the first wing, every tenth (!) mother died of puerperal sepsis, while in the second 'only' one in 25 died. Crucially, women were admitted to the clinics not on the basis of how complicated their case was, but simply on alternate days – in other words, by random allocation. Unintentionally, the hospital had created the conditions suitable for a natural experiment.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>In 1846, the young Viennese doctor Ignaz Semmelweis was appointed to the hospital. He had the suspicion that the differences in the routine practices of the two wings would give him insight into what was causing the alarmingly high mortality rates in one. He noticed that in the first wing, where 10% of young mothers perished, medical students alternated between helping women to give birth and attending post-mortem examinations of women who had died of puerperal sepsis. They carried out their work in ordinary daytime clothing rather than clean, white coats, and between autopsies and deliveries, they did not wash their hands. By contrast, the pupil midwives in the second clinic did not perform postmortem examinations. And thus, many years before the role of bacteria in diseases was known, Semmelweis concluded that the disease under his study was contagious, and that it was the <em>doctors</em> who were transmitting it.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>Semmelweis also found that a chemical would destroy the agent that led to the disease, and therefore insisted that his students disinfect their hands with it before attending the labour wards. This led to dramatic results. By 1848, the maternal mortality rates of the two clinics in the Vienna Maternity Hospital were comparable.{ref}More information on this history, the data from the two clinics in Vienna, and references to earlier precursors of Semmelweis (whose work was unknown to him) can be found in Irvine Loudon (1992) – Death in Childbirth: An International Study of Maternal Care and Maternal Mortality 1800-1950. Published on Oxford Scholarship Online: <a rel="noreferrer noopener" href="http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198229971.001.0001/acprof-9780198229971" target="_blank">http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198229971.001.0001/acprof-9780198229971</a> Loudon, I. (2013). Ignaz Phillip Semmelweis' studies of death in childbirth. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 106(11), 461-463. Available online: <a rel="noreferrer noopener" href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3807776/" target="_blank">https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3807776/</a>{/ref}</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>However, Semmelweis's insistence on his discovery that puerperal sepsis was contagious did not fit into the accepted medical understanding of the time, and this meant an agonizingly slow process of convincing the medical establishment of the importance of better hygiene and measures of antisepsis. Only in the second half of the 19th century was antisepsis widely introduced into routine obstetric practice. But this change, coupled with the discovery of antibiotics and the development of blood transfusion in the first half of the 20th century, sharply drove down the risk of dying in childbirth.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>Semmelweis's story tells us two things. First, it shows how powerful measurement can be. Decades before the modern germ theory of disease was accepted, and with no understanding of the mechanism that caused puerperal sepsis, it was the measurement of the distribution of maternal deaths that gave Semmelweis the crucial insight about what steps could be taken to effectively reduce maternal mortality. </p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>Second, it tells us how frustratingly long it can take until new discoveries become accepted and finally change practices. Semmelweis's discovery, which could have led to immediate and widespread improvements, was not widely circulated. More time would have to pass, with more knowledge accumulated, before steep reductions in maternal mortality could take place.</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:separator --> <hr class="wp-block-separator"/> <!-- /wp:separator --> <!-- wp:paragraph --> <p>We collaborated with the team from <a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.youtube.com/user/Kurzgesagt" target="_blank">Kurz Gesagt</a> and the <a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.gatesfoundation.org/" target="_blank">Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation</a> to tell this history of maternal mortality in a video for the <a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="http://www.globalgoals.org/goalkeepers/datareport/" target="_blank">Goalkeepers</a> event in 2017:</p> <!-- /wp:paragraph --> <!-- wp:columns --> <div class="wp-block-columns"><!-- wp:column --> <div class="wp-block-column"><!-- wp:html --> <iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/6Ju8yP_ZHR0" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe> <!-- /wp:html --></div> <!-- /wp:column --> <!-- wp:column --> <div class="wp-block-column"></div> <!-- /wp:column --></div> <!-- /wp:columns --> | { "id": "wp-25368", "slug": "untitled-reusable-block-66", "content": { "toc": [], "body": [ { "type": "text", "value": [ { "text": "What could be more tragic than a mother losing her life in the moment that she is giving life to her newborn? The visualization shows how common this once was. In Finland \u2013 the country in which women today have the lowest risk to die from pregnancy-related causes \u2013 we see that during much of the 19th century, maternal mortality hung between 800 and 1,000 deaths for every 100,000 births. In other words, at each birth women faced a 0.9% chance of death. And since women in Finland ", "spanType": "span-simple-text" }, { "url": "https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/total-fertility-rate?tab=chart&country=FIN", "children": [ { "text": "gave birth to 5 children", "spanType": "span-simple-text" } ], "spanType": "span-link" }, { "text": " on average at the time, this meant that the death of mothers was no rare occurrence.", "spanType": "span-simple-text" } ], "parseErrors": [] }, { "type": "text", "value": [ { "text": "The visualization also shows how maternal mortality has changed since then. Starting in the second half of the 19th century, the risk of dying during or after pregnancy has declined from 0.9% to 0.003%. Today, giving birth is 300-times safer than just a few generations ago. How was this possible?", "spanType": "span-simple-text" } ], "parseErrors": [] }, { "url": "https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/maternal-mortality?tab=chart&country=FIN+USA+OWID_WRL", "type": "chart", "parseErrors": [] }, { "text": [ { "text": "Measurement and progress: The story of Ignaz Semmelweis", "spanType": "span-simple-text" } ], "type": "heading", "level": 2, "parseErrors": [] }, { "type": "text", "value": [ { "text": "The story of the decline of maternal mortality is a story about scientific research and the importance of measurement. Today medicine makes progress by relying on ", "spanType": "span-simple-text" }, { "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomized_controlled_trial", "children": [ { "text": "randomized controlled trials", "spanType": "span-simple-text" } ], "spanType": "span-link" }, { "text": " \u2013 the history of the decline of maternal mortality started with a kind of controlled trial, one that wasn't planned, but which happened almost accidentally.", "spanType": "span-simple-text" } ], "parseErrors": [] }, { "type": "text", "value": [ { "text": "In the mid-19th century, the largest maternity hospital in the world was in Vienna. At the time puerperal sepsis was the most common cause of maternal deaths. This infection of the uterus killed new mothers shortly after childbirth.{ref}Irvine Loudon (1992) \u2013 The transformation of maternal mortality. BMJ 1992; 305:1557 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.305.6868.1557 (Published 19 December 1992){/ref} ", "spanType": "span-simple-text" } ], "parseErrors": [] }, { "type": "text", "value": [ { "text": "The Vienna Maternity Hospital was divided into two wings and for some time the doctors had noticed a stark difference between the wings that they were not able to explain. Doctors and medical students were taught in the first wing, while midwives were taught in the second. In the first wing, every tenth (!) mother died of puerperal sepsis, while in the second 'only' one in 25 died. Crucially, women were admitted to the clinics not on the basis of how complicated their case was, but simply on alternate days \u2013 in other words, by random allocation. Unintentionally, the hospital had created the conditions suitable for a natural experiment.", "spanType": "span-simple-text" } ], "parseErrors": [] }, { "type": "text", "value": [ { "text": "In 1846, the young Viennese doctor Ignaz Semmelweis was appointed to the hospital. He had the suspicion that the differences in the routine practices of the two wings would give him insight into what was causing the alarmingly high mortality rates in one. He noticed that in the first wing, where 10% of young mothers perished, medical students alternated between helping women to give birth and attending post-mortem examinations of women who had died of puerperal sepsis. They carried out their work in ordinary daytime clothing rather than clean, white coats, and between autopsies and deliveries, they did not wash their hands. By contrast, the pupil midwives in the second clinic did not perform postmortem examinations. And thus, many years before the role of bacteria in diseases was known, Semmelweis concluded that the disease under his study was contagious, and that it was the ", "spanType": "span-simple-text" }, { "children": [ { "text": "doctors", "spanType": "span-simple-text" } ], "spanType": "span-italic" }, { "text": " who were transmitting it.", "spanType": "span-simple-text" } ], "parseErrors": [] }, { "type": "text", "value": [ { "text": "Semmelweis also found that a chemical would destroy the agent that led to the disease, and therefore insisted that his students disinfect their hands with it before attending the labour wards. This led to dramatic results. By 1848, the maternal mortality rates of the two clinics in the Vienna Maternity Hospital were comparable.{ref}More information on this history, the data from the two clinics in Vienna, and references to earlier precursors of Semmelweis (whose work was unknown to him) can be found in Irvine Loudon (1992) \u2013 Death in Childbirth: An International Study of Maternal Care and Maternal Mortality 1800-1950. Published on Oxford Scholarship Online: ", "spanType": "span-simple-text" }, { "url": "http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198229971.001.0001/acprof-9780198229971", "children": [ { "text": "http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198229971.001.0001/acprof-9780198229971", "spanType": "span-simple-text" } ], "spanType": "span-link" }, { "text": " Loudon, I. (2013). Ignaz Phillip Semmelweis' studies of death in childbirth. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 106(11), 461-463. Available online: ", "spanType": "span-simple-text" }, { "url": "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3807776/", "children": [ { "text": "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3807776/", "spanType": "span-simple-text" } ], "spanType": "span-link" }, { "text": "{/ref}", "spanType": "span-simple-text" } ], "parseErrors": [] }, { "type": "text", "value": [ { "text": "However, Semmelweis's insistence on his discovery that puerperal sepsis was contagious did not fit into the accepted medical understanding of the time, and this meant an agonizingly slow process of convincing the medical establishment of the importance of better hygiene and measures of antisepsis. Only in the second half of the 19th century was antisepsis widely introduced into routine obstetric practice. But this change, coupled with the discovery of antibiotics and the development of blood transfusion in the first half of the 20th century, sharply drove down the risk of dying in childbirth.", "spanType": "span-simple-text" } ], "parseErrors": [] }, { "type": "text", "value": [ { "text": "Semmelweis's story tells us two things. First, it shows how powerful measurement can be. Decades before the modern germ theory of disease was accepted, and with no understanding of the mechanism that caused puerperal sepsis, it was the measurement of the distribution of maternal deaths that gave Semmelweis the crucial insight about what steps could be taken to effectively reduce maternal mortality. ", "spanType": "span-simple-text" } ], "parseErrors": [] }, { "type": "text", "value": [ { "text": "Second, it tells us how frustratingly long it can take until new discoveries become accepted and finally change practices. Semmelweis's discovery, which could have led to immediate and widespread improvements, was not widely circulated. More time would have to pass, with more knowledge accumulated, before steep reductions in maternal mortality could take place.", "spanType": "span-simple-text" } ], "parseErrors": [] }, { "type": "text", "value": [ { "text": "We collaborated with the team from ", "spanType": "span-simple-text" }, { "url": "https://www.youtube.com/user/Kurzgesagt", "children": [ { "text": "Kurz Gesagt", "spanType": "span-simple-text" } ], "spanType": "span-link" }, { "text": " and the ", "spanType": "span-simple-text" }, { "url": "https://www.gatesfoundation.org/", "children": [ { "text": "Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation", "spanType": "span-simple-text" } ], "spanType": "span-link" }, { "text": " to tell this history of maternal mortality in a video for the ", "spanType": "span-simple-text" }, { "url": "http://www.globalgoals.org/goalkeepers/datareport/", "children": [ { "text": "Goalkeepers", "spanType": "span-simple-text" } ], "spanType": "span-link" }, { "text": " event in 2017:", "spanType": "span-simple-text" } ], "parseErrors": [] }, { "url": "https://www.youtube.com/embed/6Ju8yP_ZHR0", "type": "chart", "parseErrors": [] } ], "type": "article", "title": "Maternal Mortality \u2013 Semmelweis", "authors": [ null ], "dateline": "October 9, 2019", "sidebar-toc": false, "featured-image": "" }, "createdAt": "2019-10-09T10:45:21.000Z", "published": false, "updatedAt": "2020-04-30T14:00:13.000Z", "revisionId": null, "publishedAt": "2019-10-09T09:45:07.000Z", "relatedCharts": [], "publicationContext": "listed" } |
{ "errors": [ { "name": "unhandled html tag found", "details": "Encountered the unhandled tag hr" }, { "name": "unexpected wp component tag", "details": "Found unhandled wp:comment tag separator" }, { "name": "iframe with src that is not a grapher", "details": "Found iframe with src that is not a grapher" } ], "numBlocks": 14, "numErrors": 3, "wpTagCounts": { "html": 2, "column": 2, "columns": 1, "heading": 1, "paragraph": 11, "separator": 1 }, "htmlTagCounts": { "p": 11, "h4": 1, "hr": 1, "div": 3, "iframe": 2 } } |
2019-10-09 09:45:07 | 2024-02-16 14:22:56 | [ null ] |
2019-10-09 10:45:21 | 2020-04-30 14:00:13 | {} |
What could be more tragic than a mother losing her life in the moment that she is giving life to her newborn? The visualization shows how common this once was. In Finland – the country in which women today have the lowest risk to die from pregnancy-related causes – we see that during much of the 19th century, maternal mortality hung between 800 and 1,000 deaths for every 100,000 births. In other words, at each birth women faced a 0.9% chance of death. And since women in Finland [gave birth to 5 children](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/total-fertility-rate?tab=chart&country=FIN) on average at the time, this meant that the death of mothers was no rare occurrence. The visualization also shows how maternal mortality has changed since then. Starting in the second half of the 19th century, the risk of dying during or after pregnancy has declined from 0.9% to 0.003%. Today, giving birth is 300-times safer than just a few generations ago. How was this possible? <Chart url="https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/maternal-mortality?tab=chart&country=FIN+USA+OWID_WRL"/> ## Measurement and progress: The story of Ignaz Semmelweis The story of the decline of maternal mortality is a story about scientific research and the importance of measurement. Today medicine makes progress by relying on [randomized controlled trials](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomized_controlled_trial) – the history of the decline of maternal mortality started with a kind of controlled trial, one that wasn't planned, but which happened almost accidentally. In the mid-19th century, the largest maternity hospital in the world was in Vienna. At the time puerperal sepsis was the most common cause of maternal deaths. This infection of the uterus killed new mothers shortly after childbirth.{ref}Irvine Loudon (1992) – The transformation of maternal mortality. BMJ 1992; 305:1557 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.305.6868.1557 (Published 19 December 1992){/ref} The Vienna Maternity Hospital was divided into two wings and for some time the doctors had noticed a stark difference between the wings that they were not able to explain. Doctors and medical students were taught in the first wing, while midwives were taught in the second. In the first wing, every tenth (!) mother died of puerperal sepsis, while in the second 'only' one in 25 died. Crucially, women were admitted to the clinics not on the basis of how complicated their case was, but simply on alternate days – in other words, by random allocation. Unintentionally, the hospital had created the conditions suitable for a natural experiment. In 1846, the young Viennese doctor Ignaz Semmelweis was appointed to the hospital. He had the suspicion that the differences in the routine practices of the two wings would give him insight into what was causing the alarmingly high mortality rates in one. He noticed that in the first wing, where 10% of young mothers perished, medical students alternated between helping women to give birth and attending post-mortem examinations of women who had died of puerperal sepsis. They carried out their work in ordinary daytime clothing rather than clean, white coats, and between autopsies and deliveries, they did not wash their hands. By contrast, the pupil midwives in the second clinic did not perform postmortem examinations. And thus, many years before the role of bacteria in diseases was known, Semmelweis concluded that the disease under his study was contagious, and that it was the _doctors_ who were transmitting it. Semmelweis also found that a chemical would destroy the agent that led to the disease, and therefore insisted that his students disinfect their hands with it before attending the labour wards. This led to dramatic results. By 1848, the maternal mortality rates of the two clinics in the Vienna Maternity Hospital were comparable.{ref}More information on this history, the data from the two clinics in Vienna, and references to earlier precursors of Semmelweis (whose work was unknown to him) can be found in Irvine Loudon (1992) – Death in Childbirth: An International Study of Maternal Care and Maternal Mortality 1800-1950. Published on Oxford Scholarship Online: [http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198229971.001.0001/acprof-9780198229971](http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198229971.001.0001/acprof-9780198229971) Loudon, I. (2013). Ignaz Phillip Semmelweis' studies of death in childbirth. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 106(11), 461-463. Available online: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3807776/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3807776/){/ref} However, Semmelweis's insistence on his discovery that puerperal sepsis was contagious did not fit into the accepted medical understanding of the time, and this meant an agonizingly slow process of convincing the medical establishment of the importance of better hygiene and measures of antisepsis. Only in the second half of the 19th century was antisepsis widely introduced into routine obstetric practice. But this change, coupled with the discovery of antibiotics and the development of blood transfusion in the first half of the 20th century, sharply drove down the risk of dying in childbirth. Semmelweis's story tells us two things. First, it shows how powerful measurement can be. Decades before the modern germ theory of disease was accepted, and with no understanding of the mechanism that caused puerperal sepsis, it was the measurement of the distribution of maternal deaths that gave Semmelweis the crucial insight about what steps could be taken to effectively reduce maternal mortality. Second, it tells us how frustratingly long it can take until new discoveries become accepted and finally change practices. Semmelweis's discovery, which could have led to immediate and widespread improvements, was not widely circulated. More time would have to pass, with more knowledge accumulated, before steep reductions in maternal mortality could take place. We collaborated with the team from [Kurz Gesagt](https://www.youtube.com/user/Kurzgesagt) and the [Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation](https://www.gatesfoundation.org/) to tell this history of maternal mortality in a video for the [Goalkeepers](http://www.globalgoals.org/goalkeepers/datareport/) event in 2017: <Chart url="https://www.youtube.com/embed/6Ju8yP_ZHR0"/> | { "data": { "wpBlock": { "content": "\n<p>What could be more tragic than a mother losing her life in the moment that she is giving life to her newborn? The visualization shows how common this once was. In Finland \u2013 the country in which women today have the lowest risk to die from pregnancy-related causes \u2013 we see that during much of the 19th century, maternal mortality hung between 800 and 1,000 deaths for every 100,000 births. In other words, at each birth women faced a 0.9% chance of death. And since women in Finland <a href=\"https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/total-fertility-rate?tab=chart&country=FIN\">gave birth to 5 children</a> on average at the time, this meant that the death of mothers was no rare occurrence.</p>\n\n\n\n<p>The visualization also shows how maternal mortality has changed since then. Starting in the second half of the 19th century, the risk of dying during or after pregnancy has declined from 0.9% to 0.003%. Today, giving birth is 300-times safer than just a few generations ago. How was this possible?</p>\n\n\n\n<iframe loading=\"lazy\" style=\"width: 100%; height: 600px; border: 0px none;\" src=\"https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/maternal-mortality?tab=chart&country=FIN+USA+OWID_WRL\" width=\"300\" height=\"150\"></iframe>\n\n\n\n<h4>Measurement and progress: The story of Ignaz Semmelweis</h4>\n\n\n\n<p>The story of the decline of maternal mortality is a story about scientific research and the importance of measurement. Today medicine makes progress by relying on <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomized_controlled_trial\">randomized controlled trials</a> \u2013 the history of the decline of maternal mortality started with a kind of controlled trial, one that wasn’t planned, but which happened almost accidentally.</p>\n\n\n\n<p>In the mid-19th century, the largest maternity hospital in the world was in Vienna. At the time puerperal sepsis was the most common cause of maternal deaths. This infection of the uterus killed new mothers shortly after childbirth.{ref}Irvine Loudon (1992) \u2013 The transformation of maternal mortality. BMJ 1992; 305:1557 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.305.6868.1557 (Published 19 December 1992){/ref} </p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Vienna Maternity Hospital was divided into two wings and for some time the doctors had noticed a stark difference between the wings that they were not able to explain. Doctors and medical students were taught in the first wing, while midwives were taught in the second. In the first wing, every tenth (!) mother died of puerperal sepsis, while in the second ‘only’ one in 25 died. Crucially, women were admitted to the clinics not on the basis of how complicated their case was, but simply on alternate days \u2013 in other words, by random allocation. Unintentionally, the hospital had created the conditions suitable for a natural experiment.</p>\n\n\n\n<p>In 1846, the young Viennese doctor Ignaz Semmelweis was appointed to the hospital. He had the suspicion that the differences in the routine practices of the two wings would give him insight into what was causing the alarmingly high mortality rates in one. He noticed that in the first wing, where 10% of young mothers perished, medical students alternated between helping women to give birth and attending post-mortem examinations of women who had died of puerperal sepsis. They carried out their work in ordinary daytime clothing rather than clean, white coats, and between autopsies and deliveries, they did not wash their hands. By contrast, the pupil midwives in the second clinic did not perform postmortem examinations. And thus, many years before the role of bacteria in diseases was known, Semmelweis concluded that the disease under his study was contagious, and that it was the <em>doctors</em> who were transmitting it.</p>\n\n\n\n<p>Semmelweis also found that a chemical would destroy the agent that led to the disease, and therefore insisted that his students disinfect their hands with it before attending the labour wards. This led to dramatic results. By 1848, the maternal mortality rates of the two clinics in the Vienna Maternity Hospital were comparable.{ref}More information on this history, the data from the two clinics in Vienna, and references to earlier precursors of Semmelweis (whose work was unknown to him) can be found in Irvine Loudon (1992) \u2013 Death in Childbirth: An International Study of Maternal Care and Maternal Mortality 1800-1950. Published on Oxford Scholarship Online: <a rel=\"noreferrer noopener\" href=\"http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198229971.001.0001/acprof-9780198229971\" target=\"_blank\">http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198229971.001.0001/acprof-9780198229971</a> Loudon, I. (2013). Ignaz Phillip Semmelweis’ studies of death in childbirth. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 106(11), 461-463. Available online: <a rel=\"noreferrer noopener\" href=\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3807776/\" target=\"_blank\">https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3807776/</a>{/ref}</p>\n\n\n\n<p>However, Semmelweis’s insistence on his discovery that puerperal sepsis was contagious did not fit into the accepted medical understanding of the time, and this meant an agonizingly slow process of convincing the medical establishment of the importance of better hygiene and measures of antisepsis. Only in the second half of the 19th century was antisepsis widely introduced into routine obstetric practice. But this change, coupled with the discovery of antibiotics and the development of blood transfusion in the first half of the 20th century, sharply drove down the risk of dying in childbirth.</p>\n\n\n\n<p>Semmelweis’s story tells us two things. First, it shows how powerful measurement can be. Decades before the modern germ theory of disease was accepted, and with no understanding of the mechanism that caused puerperal sepsis, it was the measurement of the distribution of maternal deaths that gave Semmelweis the crucial insight about what steps could be taken to effectively reduce maternal mortality. </p>\n\n\n\n<p>Second, it tells us how frustratingly long it can take until new discoveries become accepted and finally change practices. Semmelweis’s discovery, which could have led to immediate and widespread improvements, was not widely circulated. More time would have to pass, with more knowledge accumulated, before steep reductions in maternal mortality could take place.</p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator\"/>\n\n\n\n<p>We collaborated with the team from <a rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" href=\"https://www.youtube.com/user/Kurzgesagt\" target=\"_blank\">Kurz Gesagt</a> and the <a rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" href=\"https://www.gatesfoundation.org/\" target=\"_blank\">Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation</a> to tell this history of maternal mortality in a video for the <a rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" href=\"http://www.globalgoals.org/goalkeepers/datareport/\" target=\"_blank\">Goalkeepers</a> event in 2017:</p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-columns\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-column\">\n<iframe loading=\"lazy\" src=\"https://www.youtube.com/embed/6Ju8yP_ZHR0\" width=\"560\" height=\"315\" frameborder=\"0\" allowfullscreen=\"allowfullscreen\"></iframe>\n</div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-column\"></div>\n</div>\n" } }, "extensions": { "debug": [ { "type": "DEBUG_LOGS_INACTIVE", "message": "GraphQL Debug logging is not active. To see debug logs, GRAPHQL_DEBUG must be enabled." } ] } } |