OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to estimate the incidence of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) in the United States and to assess trends. STUDY DESIGN: Population-based data from the 1994-2006 National Inpatient Sample were used to identify women who were hospitalized with postpartum hemorrhage. Data for each year were plotted, and trends were assessed. Multivariable logistic regression was used in an attempt to explain the difference in PPH incidence between 1994 and 2006. RESULTS: PPH increased 26% between 1994 and 2006 from 2.3% (n = 85,954) to 2.9% (n = 124,708; P < .001). The increase primarily was due to an increase in uterine atony, from 1.6% (n = 58,597) to 2.4% (n = 99,904; P < .001). The increase in PPH could not be explained by changes in rates of cesarean delivery, vaginal birth after cesarean delivery, maternal age, multiple birth, hypertension, or diabetes mellitus. CONCLUSION: Population-based surveillance data signal an apparent increase in PPH caused by uterine atony. More nuanced clinical data are needed to understand the factors that are associated with this trend. Published by Mosby, Inc.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to estimate the incidence of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) in the United States and to assess trends. STUDY DESIGN: Population-based data from the 1994-2006 National Inpatient Sample were used to identify women who were hospitalized with postpartum hemorrhage. Data for each year were plotted, and trends were assessed. Multivariable logistic regression was used in an attempt to explain the difference in PPH incidence between 1994 and 2006. RESULTS: PPH increased 26% between 1994 and 2006 from 2.3% (n = 85,954) to 2.9% (n = 124,708; P < .001). The increase primarily was due to an increase in uterine atony, from 1.6% (n = 58,597) to 2.4% (n = 99,904; P < .001). The increase in PPH could not be explained by changes in rates of cesarean delivery, vaginal birth after cesarean delivery, maternal age, multiple birth, hypertension, or diabetes mellitus. CONCLUSION: Population-based surveillance data signal an apparent increase in PPH caused by uterine atony. More nuanced clinical data are needed to understand the factors that are associated with this trend. Published by Mosby, Inc.
Authors: B T Bateman; S Hernandez-Diaz; K F Huybrechts; K Palmsten; H Mogun; J L Ecker; E W Seely; M A Fischer Journal: BJOG Date: 2013-09-11 Impact factor: 6.531
Authors: Jill M Mhyre; Alexander Shilkrut; Elena V Kuklina; William M Callaghan; Andreea A Creanga; Sari Kaminsky; Brian T Bateman Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Lynn M Yee; Paula McGee; Jennifer L Bailit; Uma M Reddy; Ronald J Wapner; Michael W Varner; John M Thorp; Kenneth J Leveno; Steve N Caritis; Mona Prasad; Alan T N Tita; George Saade; Yoram Sorokin; Dwight J Rouse; Sean C Blackwell; Jorge E Tolosa Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Shayna N Conner; Methodius G Tuuli; Ryan Colvin; Anthony L Shanks; George A Macones; Alison G Cahill Journal: Am J Perinatol Date: 2015-05-22 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Ada Gillissen; Thomas van den Akker; Camila Caram-Deelder; Dacia D C A Henriquez; Kitty W M Bloemenkamp; Moniek P M de Maat; Jos J M van Roosmalen; Joost J Zwart; Jeroen Eikenboom; Johanna G van der Bom Journal: Blood Adv Date: 2018-10-09
Authors: F Carol Bruce; Cynthia J Berg; Peter J Joski; Douglas W Roblin; William M Callaghan; Joanna E Bulkley; Donald J Bachman; Mark C Hornbrook Journal: Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol Date: 2012-08-29 Impact factor: 3.980
Authors: Alexander J Butwick; Eileen M Walsh; Michael Kuzniewicz; Sherian X Li; Gabriel J Escobar Journal: Transfusion Date: 2018-01-26 Impact factor: 3.157