Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2018
Comparison of neonatal outcomes between category-1 and non-category-1 Primary Emergency Cesarean Section: A retrospective record review in a tertiary care hospital.
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.
Dur-E-Shahwar, Ahmed Iffat, Amerjee Azra, Hoodbhoy Zahra
Аннотация
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 1st 2016 till December 31st 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.
METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis, conducted at Aga Khan University Hospital Karachi from January 1st 2016 till December 31st 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.