International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2021
Venous thromboembolism risk and prophylaxis in hospitalized obstetric patients at a tertiary hospital in Accra, Ghana: A comparative cross-sectional study.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Sefogah Promise E, Nuamah Mercy A, Swarray-Deen Alim, Mumuni Kareem, Onuzo Chibuikem N, Seffah Joseph D
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of venous thromboembolism risk and thromboprophylaxis among obstetric inpatients, comparing prenatal and postnatal women.
METHODS: We assessed 546 obstetric inpatients at the Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital for the prevalence study. Out of this number, 223 were recruited, comprising 111 prenatal and 112 postnatal mothers. A structured interviewer-administered questionnaire was used to obtain data on participants' venous thromboembolism risk, which was categorized into high, intermediate, and low using the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists guidelines. Data on thromboprophylaxis were also obtained and analyzed. Values were considered statistically significant at p < 0.05.
RESULTS: Overall venous thromboembolism risk among the study population was 82/223 (36.8%). All patients at high risk were prenatal, 59/112 (52.7%) of postnatal mothers were at intermediate risk, compared with 20/111 (18.0%) of prenatal women (p < 0.001). Prevalence of thromboprophylaxis was 5/82 (6.1%). All prenatal high-risk patients received thromboprophylaxis, whereas only 2/20 (10.0%) of women with intermediate risk received thromboprophylaxis. The incidence of venous thromboembolism was 3/546 (0.6%) in the obstetric inpatients.
CONCLUSION: Our study found a high prevalence of venous thromboembolism risk among obstetric inpatients at the Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital. However, thromboprophylaxis was low. Further research is needed to audit recent practice of thromboprophylaxis and perinatal outcome.
METHODS: We assessed 546 obstetric inpatients at the Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital for the prevalence study. Out of this number, 223 were recruited, comprising 111 prenatal and 112 postnatal mothers. A structured interviewer-administered questionnaire was used to obtain data on participants' venous thromboembolism risk, which was categorized into high, intermediate, and low using the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists guidelines. Data on thromboprophylaxis were also obtained and analyzed. Values were considered statistically significant at p < 0.05.
RESULTS: Overall venous thromboembolism risk among the study population was 82/223 (36.8%). All patients at high risk were prenatal, 59/112 (52.7%) of postnatal mothers were at intermediate risk, compared with 20/111 (18.0%) of prenatal women (p < 0.001). Prevalence of thromboprophylaxis was 5/82 (6.1%). All prenatal high-risk patients received thromboprophylaxis, whereas only 2/20 (10.0%) of women with intermediate risk received thromboprophylaxis. The incidence of venous thromboembolism was 3/546 (0.6%) in the obstetric inpatients.
CONCLUSION: Our study found a high prevalence of venous thromboembolism risk among obstetric inpatients at the Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital. However, thromboprophylaxis was low. Further research is needed to audit recent practice of thromboprophylaxis and perinatal outcome.