Cureus · 2022
Comparing Postpartum Estimated and Quantified Blood Loss Among Racial Groups: An Observational Study.
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.
Katz Daniel, Khadge Shradha, Carvalho Brendan
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Racial and ethnic disparities in peripartum blood loss and postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) have not been adequately evaluated. We sought to compare postpartum blood loss and PPH in African American and Hispanic parturients compared to other groups.
METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of an observational study at a tertiary academic center of a historical (August 2016 to January 2017) and interventional (August 2017 to January 2018) cohort of 7618 deliveries. Visual estimation of blood loss (EBL) was used in the historical group and quantitative blood loss (QBL) was implemented in the intervention group. Our primary endpoint was median blood loss in African Americans versus other racial groups between cohorts.
RESULTS: A total of 7618 deliveries were evaluated; 755 (9.9%) were identified as African American with 1035 (13.6%) identifying as Hispanic. Blood loss was similar in racial groups using EBL (p=0.131), but not QBL that was 430 (227-771) in African Americans and 348 (200-612) in non-African Americans (p<0.001). PPH was greater among African Americans in both groups (10.3% vs. 6.9% in EBL cohort, p=0.023, and 16.9% vs. 11.6% in QBL cohort, p<0.001).
CONCLUSION: Racial and ethnic differences in peripartum blood loss were more apparent with QBL than EBL. It is unknown if these differences are caused by provider cognitive bias, socioeconomic differences, language barriers and/or other factors.
METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of an observational study at a tertiary academic center of a historical (August 2016 to January 2017) and interventional (August 2017 to January 2018) cohort of 7618 deliveries. Visual estimation of blood loss (EBL) was used in the historical group and quantitative blood loss (QBL) was implemented in the intervention group. Our primary endpoint was median blood loss in African Americans versus other racial groups between cohorts.
RESULTS: A total of 7618 deliveries were evaluated; 755 (9.9%) were identified as African American with 1035 (13.6%) identifying as Hispanic. Blood loss was similar in racial groups using EBL (p=0.131), but not QBL that was 430 (227-771) in African Americans and 348 (200-612) in non-African Americans (p<0.001). PPH was greater among African Americans in both groups (10.3% vs. 6.9% in EBL cohort, p=0.023, and 16.9% vs. 11.6% in QBL cohort, p<0.001).
CONCLUSION: Racial and ethnic differences in peripartum blood loss were more apparent with QBL than EBL. It is unknown if these differences are caused by provider cognitive bias, socioeconomic differences, language barriers and/or other factors.