OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of non-pneumatic anti-shock garment (NASG) on blood loss from obstetric haemorrhage with standard management of obstetric haemorrhage. DESIGN: Observational study of consecutive obstetric haemorrhage cases before and after introduction of the NASG. SETTING: Four tertiary care maternity facilities in Egypt. SAMPLE: The sample consisted of women with obstetric haemorrhage and signs of shock and the entry criteria were: >750 mL of blood loss and either pulse of >100 beats per minute or systolic blood pressure of <100 mmHg. A total of 158 women were in the preintervention group and 206 in the postintervention group. METHODS: All the women with haemorrhage meeting the eligibility criteria were treated according to the standard protocol for 4 months (May-August 2004); blood loss was measured and recorded. The NASG was then introduced, and all the women meeting the eligibility criteria were treated according to the standard haemorrhage protocol plus the NASG for 4 months (September-December 2004). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Measured blood loss collected in a closed-end, graduated, plastic, under buttocks collection drape. RESULTS: Median measured blood loss in the drape following study entry was 50% lower in those treated with the NASG (250 versus 500 mL, P < 0.001). There was also a non-statistically significant decrease in morbidity and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first comparative study of the NASG with a standard obstetric haemorrhage treatment protocol. The NASG shows promise for management of obstetric haemorrhage, particularly in lower resource settings. Larger studies will be needed to determine if the NASG contributes to statistically significant decreases in morbidity and mortality.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of non-pneumatic anti-shock garment (NASG) on blood loss from obstetric haemorrhage with standard management of obstetric haemorrhage. DESIGN: Observational study of consecutive obstetric haemorrhage cases before and after introduction of the NASG. SETTING: Four tertiary care maternity facilities in Egypt. SAMPLE: The sample consisted of women with obstetric haemorrhage and signs of shock and the entry criteria were: >750 mL of blood loss and either pulse of >100 beats per minute or systolic blood pressure of <100 mmHg. A total of 158 women were in the preintervention group and 206 in the postintervention group. METHODS: All the women with haemorrhage meeting the eligibility criteria were treated according to the standard protocol for 4 months (May-August 2004); blood loss was measured and recorded. The NASG was then introduced, and all the women meeting the eligibility criteria were treated according to the standard haemorrhage protocol plus the NASG for 4 months (September-December 2004). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Measured blood loss collected in a closed-end, graduated, plastic, under buttocks collection drape. RESULTS: Median measured blood loss in the drape following study entry was 50% lower in those treated with the NASG (250 versus 500 mL, P < 0.001). There was also a non-statistically significant decrease in morbidity and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first comparative study of the NASG with a standard obstetric haemorrhage treatment protocol. The NASG shows promise for management of obstetric haemorrhage, particularly in lower resource settings. Larger studies will be needed to determine if the NASG contributes to statistically significant decreases in morbidity and mortality.
Authors: Stacie E Geller; Shivaprasad S Goudar; Marci G Adams; Vijaya A Naik; Ashlesha Patel; Mrutyunjaya B Bellad; Shobhana S Patted; Stanley A Edlavitch; Nancy Moss; Bhalchandra S Kodkany; Richard J Derman Journal: Int J Gynaecol Obstet Date: 2008-03-04 Impact factor: 3.561
Authors: Janet Turan; Oladosu Ojengbede; Mohamed Fathalla; Mohammed Mourad-Youssif; Imran O Morhason-Bello; David Nsima; Jessica Morris; Elizabeth Butrick; Hilarie Martin; Carol Camlin; Suellen Miller Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2010-12-29 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Suellen Miller; Mohamed M F Fathalla; Oladosu A Ojengbede; Carol Camlin; Mohammed Mourad-Youssif; Imran O Morhason-Bello; Hadiza Galadanci; David Nsima; Elizabeth Butrick; Tarek Al Hussaini; Janet Turan; Carinne Meyer; Hilarie Martin; Aminu I Mohammed Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2010-10-18 Impact factor: 3.007
Authors: Mohammed Mourad-Youssif; Oladosu A Ojengbede; Carinne D Meyer; Mohammad Fathalla; Imran O Morhason-Bello; Hadiza Galadanci; Carol Camlin; David Nsima; Tarek Al Hussaini; Elizabeth Butrick; Suellen Miller Journal: Reprod Health Date: 2010-09-01 Impact factor: 3.223
Authors: Mohamed M F Fathalla; Mohammed Mourad Youssif; Carinne Meyer; Carol Camlin; Janet Turan; Jessica Morris; Elizabeth Butrick; Suellen Miller Journal: ISRN Obstet Gynecol Date: 2011-08-10
Authors: Cynthia Pileggi-Castro; Vicky Nogueira-Pileggi; Özge Tunçalp; Olufemi Taiwo Oladapo; Joshua Peter Vogel; João Paulo Souza Journal: Reprod Health Date: 2015-03-31 Impact factor: 3.223
Authors: Alison M El Ayadi; Hannah L Nathan; Paul T Seed; Elizabeth A Butrick; Natasha L Hezelgrave; Andrew H Shennan; Suellen Miller Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-02-22 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Suellen Miller; Eduardo F Bergel; Alison M El Ayadi; Luz Gibbons; Elizabeth A Butrick; Thulani Magwali; Gricelia Mkumba; Christine Kaseba; N T My Huong; Jillian D Geissler; Mario Merialdi Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-10-23 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Alison M El Ayadi; Elizabeth Butrick; Jillian Geissler; Suellen Miller Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2013-11-15 Impact factor: 3.007