Literature DB >> 16752234

Predictions for the decision-to-delivery interval for emergency cesarean sections in Norway.

Toril Kolås1, Dag Hofoss, Pål Oian.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To explain the variation in decision-to-delivery intervals in emergency cesarean sections in Norway.
METHODS: A seven-month prospective registration of all emergency cesareans provided by 24 maternity units. The clinician in charge filled in a predesigned form for each delivery that obtained detailed information about obstetric history, the pregnancy, indication, the date and time of delivery, decision-to-delivery interval, seniority of the surgeon, and neonatal outcome until hospital discharge. To take account of the clustered nature of our observations, data were analyzed by multilevel regression.
RESULTS: 1,511 singleton emergency cesarean sections with known decision-to-delivery interval were included. The average decision-to-delivery interval for all emergency cesarean sections was 52.4 min, for acute cesarean sections 58.7 min, and for urgent emergency operations 11.8 min. Most of the decision-to-delivery interval variation was at patient level, not between departments. Several significant decision-to-delivery interval predictors were identified: 1. abruptio placentae (-54 min), umbilical cord prolapse (-37 min), and fetal stress (-35 min); 2. general anesthesia (versus regional) (-15 min), 3. cesarean sections performed during night-time (-10 min), 4. seniority of the surgeon (-6 min), and 5. cervical opening (for each cm: -6 min).
CONCLUSIONS: The variance in the decision-to-delivery interval was mainly explained by the different nature of the cesarean sections. The most important predictors, which all acted to reduce decision-to-delivery interval, were the three indications abruptio placentae, cord prolapse, and fetal stress. Sections performed during night-time had significantly reduced decision-to-delivery interval. The size of the maternal units as measured by number of deliveries per year was not a significant predictor.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16752234     DOI: 10.1080/00016340600589487

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand        ISSN: 0001-6349            Impact factor:   3.636


  6 in total

1.  Decision Delivery Interval in Emergency and Urgent Caesarean Sections: Need to Reconsider the Recommendations?

Authors:  Nalini Mishra; Ruchi Gupta; Nomita Singh
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India       Date:  2017-04-13

2.  How often is a low Apgar score the result of substandard care during labour?

Authors:  S Berglund; H Pettersson; S Cnattingius; C Grunewald
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2010-04-20       Impact factor: 6.531

3.  Evaluation of decision-to-delivery interval in emergency cesarean section: A 1-year prospective audit in a tertiary care hospital.

Authors:  Sunanda Gupta; Udita Naithani; C Madhanmohan; Ajay Singh; Pradeep Reddy; Apoorva Gupta
Journal:  J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2017 Jan-Mar

4.  Decision to delivery interval and associated factors for emergency cesarean section: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Tebabere Moltot Kitaw; Simachew Kassa Limenh; Fantahun Alemnew Chekole; Simegnew Asmer Getie; Belete Negese Gemeda; Abayneh Shewangzaw Engda
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2021-03-20       Impact factor: 3.007

5.  Using machine learning to identify quality-of-care predictors for emergency caesarean sections: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Betina Ristorp Andersen; Ida Ammitzbøll; Jesper Hinrich; Sune Lehmann; Charlotte Vibeke Ringsted; Ellen Christine Leth Løkkegaard; Martin G Tolsgaard
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-03-07       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Decision - delivery interval and perinatal outcome of emergency caesarean sections at a tertiary institution.

Authors:  Onyedikachi Edwin Chukwudi; Chukwunwendu Anthony Okonkwo
Journal:  Pak J Med Sci       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 1.088

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.