Comparison of neonatal outcomes between category-1 and non-category-1 Primary Emergency Cesarean Section: A retrospective record review in a tertiary care hospital

比较一级和非一级急诊剖宫产新生儿结局:一家三级医院的回顾性病历分析

阅读:1

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare neonatal outcomes between Category-1 and Non-Category-1 Primary Emergency Cesarean Section. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis, conducted at Aga Khan University Hospital Karachi from January 1(st) 2016 till December 31(st) 2016. Non-probability purposive sampling technique was used. A sample size of 375 patients who had primary Emergency Caesarean Section (Em-CS) was identified by keeping CS rate of 41.5% and 5% bond on error. Data was collected from labor ward, operating theatre and neonatal ward records by using structured questionnaire. RESULTS: In the current study, out of 375 participants who underwent primary Em-CS; majority (89.3%) were booked cases. Two-hundred-eighty-two (75.2%) were primiparous women. Two hundred and thirty (61.3%) were at term and 145(38.7%) were preterm. The main indication among Category-1 CS was fetal distress (15.7%). For Non-Category-1 CS, non-progress of labour (45.1%) was the leading cause of abdominal delivery. Except for APGAR score at one minute (p value = 0.048), no other variables were statistically significant when neonatal outcomes were compared among Category-1 and Non-Category-1 CS. CONCLUSION: In this study, fetal distress and non-progress of labor were the main indications for Category-1 and Non-Category-1 CS respectively. We did not find statistically significant association between indications of Em CS and neonatal outcomes. However further prospective studies are required to confirm this association.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。