Journal of Ayub Medical College, Abbottabad : JAMC · 2015
RATE AND INDICATIONS OF ELECTIVE AND EMERGENCY CAESAREAN SECTION; A STUDY IN A TERTIARY CARE HOSPITAL OF PESHAWAR.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Naeem Mohammad, Khan Muhammad Zia Ul Islam, Abbas Syed Hussain, Khan Ayasha, Adil Muhammad, Khan Muhammad Usman
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The study was conducted to determine the rate and clinical indications for emergency and elective caesarean section.
METHODS: This was a cross-sectional descriptive study conducted from December 2010 to January 2011 in Gynaecology unit-A of Lady Reading Hospital Peshawar. Consecutive patients who gave birth in the hospital during the study period were included in the study. There were a total of 966 patients. Mode of delivery and basic demographics of the patients who underwent elective and emergency caesarean section were noted down. Clinical indications were recorded.
RESULTS: Out of 966 patients, 210 underwent caesarean section. Therefore, the rate of caesarean section was 21.7 per 100. Among those 78% (n=164) were emergency caesarean sections and others were elective caesarean sections. Top six indicators for caesarean sections were foetal distress 17.1% (n=36), obstructive labour/failure to progress 16.1% (n=34), previous caesarean section 15.2% (n=32), breech presentation 9.5% (n=20), cephalopelvic disproportion 6.1% (n=13), failed induction 5.7% (n=12) and pregnancy induced hypertension (PIH) 5.7% (n=12).
CONCLUSION: The rate of caesarean section was only slightly higher than recommended by the WHO. Most of caesarean sections were emergency caesarean sections.
METHODS: This was a cross-sectional descriptive study conducted from December 2010 to January 2011 in Gynaecology unit-A of Lady Reading Hospital Peshawar. Consecutive patients who gave birth in the hospital during the study period were included in the study. There were a total of 966 patients. Mode of delivery and basic demographics of the patients who underwent elective and emergency caesarean section were noted down. Clinical indications were recorded.
RESULTS: Out of 966 patients, 210 underwent caesarean section. Therefore, the rate of caesarean section was 21.7 per 100. Among those 78% (n=164) were emergency caesarean sections and others were elective caesarean sections. Top six indicators for caesarean sections were foetal distress 17.1% (n=36), obstructive labour/failure to progress 16.1% (n=34), previous caesarean section 15.2% (n=32), breech presentation 9.5% (n=20), cephalopelvic disproportion 6.1% (n=13), failed induction 5.7% (n=12) and pregnancy induced hypertension (PIH) 5.7% (n=12).
CONCLUSION: The rate of caesarean section was only slightly higher than recommended by the WHO. Most of caesarean sections were emergency caesarean sections.