Audrey A Merriam1, Jason D Wright1, Zainab Siddiq1, Mary E D'Alton1, Alexander M Friedman1, Cande V Ananth1,2, Brian T Bateman3. 1. a Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology , College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University , New York , NY , USA. 2. b Department of Epidemiology , Joseph L. Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University , New York , NY , USA. 3. c Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital; the Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine , Harvard Medical School , Boston , MA , USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to characterize risk for and temporal trends in postpartum hemorrhage across hospitals with different delivery volumes. STUDY DESIGN: This study used the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) to characterize risk for postpartum hemorrhage from 1998 to 2011. Hospitals were classified as having either low, moderate or high delivery volume (≤1000, 1001 to 2000, >2000 deliveries per year, respectively). The primary outcomes included postpartum hemorrhage, transfusion, and related severe maternal morbidity. Adjusted models were created to assess factors associated with hemorrhage and transfusion. RESULTS: Of 55,140,088 deliveries included for analysis 1,512,212 (2.7%) had a diagnosis of postpartum hemorrhage and 361,081 (0.7%) received transfusion. Risk for morbidity and transfusion increased over the study period, while the rate of hemorrhage was stable ranging from 2.5 to 2.9%. After adjustment, hospital volume was not a major risk factor for transfusion or hemorrhage. DISCUSSION: While obstetric volume does not appear to be a major risk factor for either transfusion or hemorrhage, given that transfusion and hemorrhage-related maternal morbidity are increasing across hospital volume categories, there is an urgent need to improve obstetrical care for postpartum hemorrhage. Those risk factors are able to discriminate women at increased risk supports routine use of hemorrhage risk assessment.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to characterize risk for and temporal trends in postpartum hemorrhage across hospitals with different delivery volumes. STUDY DESIGN: This study used the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) to characterize risk for postpartum hemorrhage from 1998 to 2011. Hospitals were classified as having either low, moderate or high delivery volume (≤1000, 1001 to 2000, >2000 deliveries per year, respectively). The primary outcomes included postpartum hemorrhage, transfusion, and related severe maternal morbidity. Adjusted models were created to assess factors associated with hemorrhage and transfusion. RESULTS: Of 55,140,088 deliveries included for analysis 1,512,212 (2.7%) had a diagnosis of postpartum hemorrhage and 361,081 (0.7%) received transfusion. Risk for morbidity and transfusion increased over the study period, while the rate of hemorrhage was stable ranging from 2.5 to 2.9%. After adjustment, hospital volume was not a major risk factor for transfusion or hemorrhage. DISCUSSION: While obstetric volume does not appear to be a major risk factor for either transfusion or hemorrhage, given that transfusion and hemorrhage-related maternal morbidity are increasing across hospital volume categories, there is an urgent need to improve obstetrical care for postpartum hemorrhage. Those risk factors are able to discriminate women at increased risk supports routine use of hemorrhage risk assessment.
Authors: Elena V Kuklina; Maura K Whiteman; Susan D Hillis; Denise J Jamieson; Susan F Meikle; Samuel F Posner; Polly A Marchbanks Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2007-08-10
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: Alexander J Butwick; Brendan Carvalho; Yair J Blumenfeld; Yasser Y El-Sayed; Lorene M Nelson; Brian T Bateman Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2015-01-09 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Steven L Clark; Michael A Belfort; Gary A Dildy; Melissa A Herbst; Janet A Meyers; Gary D Hankins Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2008-05-02 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Jason D Wright; Thomas J Herzog; Jennifer Tsui; Cande V Ananth; Sharyn N Lewin; Yu-Shiang Lu; Alfred I Neugut; Dawn L Hershman Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Arielle Fein; Timothy Wen; Jason D Wright; Dena Goffman; Mary E D'Alton; Frank J Attenello; William J Mack; Alexander M Friedman Journal: J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med Date: 2019-04-09
Authors: Kartik K Venkatesh; Robert A Strauss; Chad A Grotegut; R Philip Heine; Nancy C Chescheir; Jeffrey S A Stringer; David M Stamilio; Katherine M Menard; J Eric Jelovsek Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 7.623
Authors: Sara C Handley; Molly Passarella; Heidi M Herrick; Julia D Interrante; Scott A Lorch; Katy B Kozhimannil; Ciaran S Phibbs; Elizabeth E Foglia Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-10-01
Authors: Edward Jegasothy; Jillian Patterson; Deborah Randall; Tanya A Nippita; Judy M Simpson; David O Irving; Jane B Ford Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2018-11-16 Impact factor: 4.615