These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Evaluating Facility-Based Decision-Making in Women with a Prior Cesarean Delivery and Association with Maternal and Perinatal Outcomes.
    Author: Boatin AA, Adu-Bonsaffoh K, Wylie BJ, Obed SA.
    Journal: Matern Child Health J; 2017 Sep; 21(9):1845-1852. PubMed ID: 28699093.
    Abstract:
    Objective To describe facility-based decision-making for women with one prior cesarean delivery (CD) in a resource-limited setting and to characterize maternal and perinatal outcomes in these groups. Methods One year retrospective study of women with one prior CD delivering at Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital (KBTH), Ghana. Women were categorized into three groups based on initial plan of management on admission [trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC), emergency repeat CD (EMCD) or non-emergent repeat CD (RCD)]. Characteristics and outcomes across these groups were then compared. Results During the study period, 1247 women with one prior CD delivered at KBTH, of which 377 (30.2%) were triaged to RCD, 439 (35.2%) to EMCD and 431 (34.6%) to TOLAC. Twelve uterine ruptures and no maternal deaths occurred. Perinatal mortality was 4.2% (n = 52). Compared to the RCD group, the TOLAC group had a lower risk for maternal adverse events (aOR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-1.0; p = 0.04) and non-significant higher risk of perinatal adverse events (aOR 1.6, 95% CI 0.7-3.3; p = 0.25). Compared to women triaged to RCD, the EMCD group had a non-significant increase in risk of maternal adverse events (aOR 1.6, 95% CI 0.8-3.5; p = 0.2) and a significantly higher rate of perinatal adverse events (aOR 2.4, 95% CI 1.2-4.9; p = 0.01). Conclusions for Practice Women triaged to EMCD at admission are different when compared to women allowed a TOLAC or offered a non-emergent RCD. These women bear increased rates of adverse outcomes and should be considered as a separate group for analysis in future studies conducted in similar settings.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]