Literature DB >> 29037483

New labor management guidelines and changes in cesarean delivery patterns.

Joshua I Rosenbloom1, Molly J Stout2, Methodius G Tuuli2, Candice L Woolfolk2, Julia D López2, George A Macones2, Alison G Cahill2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In 2010 the Consortium on Safe Labor published labor curves. It was proposed that the rate of cesarean delivery could be lowered by avoiding the diagnosis of arrest of dilation before 6 cm. However, there is little information on the uptake of the guidelines and on changes in cesarean delivery rates that may have occurred.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to test the following hypotheses: (1) among patients laboring at term, rates of arrest of dilation disorders have decreased, leading to a decrease in the rate of cesarean delivery; (2) in the second stage, pushing duration prior to diagnosis of arrest of descent has increased, also leading to a reduction in the rate of cesarean delivery for this indication. As a secondary aim, we investigated changes in maternal and neonatal morbidity. STUDY
DESIGN: This was a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study of all patients presenting at ≥37 weeks' gestation from 2010 through 2014 with a nonanomalous vertex singleton and no prior history of cesarean delivery. Rates of cesarean delivery, arrest of dilation, and changes in rates of maternal and neonatal morbidity were calculated in crude and adjusted models. Cervical dilation at diagnosis of the arrest of dilation, time spent at the maximal dilation prior to diagnosis of arrest of dilation, and time in the second stage prior to the diagnosis of arrest of descent were compared over the study period.
RESULTS: There were 7845 eligible patients. The cesarean delivery rate in 2010 was 15.8% and, in 2014, 17.7% (P trend = .51). In patients undergoing cesarean delivery for the arrest of dilation, the median cervical dilation at the time of cesarean delivery was at 5.5 cm in 2010 and 6.0 cm in 2014 (P trend = .94). In these patients, there was an increase in the time spent at last dilation: 3.8 hours in 2010 to 5.2 hours in 2014 (P trend = .02). There was no change in the frequency of patients diagnosed with the arrest of dilation at <6 cm: 51.4% in 2010 and 48.6% in 2014 (P trend = .56). However, in these patients, the median time spent at the last cervical dilation was 4.0 hours in 2010 and 6.7 hours in 2014 (P trend = .046). There were 206 cesarean deliveries for the arrest of descent. The median pushing time in these patients increased in multiparous patients from 1.1 hours in 2010 to 3.4 hours in 2014 (P trend = .009); in nulliparous patients these times were 2.7 hours in 2010 and 3.8 hours in 2014 (P trend = .09). There was a significant trend toward increasing adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes (P < .001 for each). The adjusted odds ratio for adverse maternal outcome for 2014 compared with 2010 was 1.66 (95% confidence interval, 1.27-2.17); however, considering only transfusion, hemorrhage, or infection, there was no difference (P trend = .96). The adjusted odds ratio of adverse neonatal outcome in 2014 compared with 2010 was 1.80 (95% confidence interval, 1.36-2.36).
CONCLUSION: Despite significant changes in labor management that have occurred over the initial years since publication of the new labor curves and associated guidelines, the primary cesarean delivery rate was not reduced and there has been an increase in maternal and neonatal morbidity in our institution. A randomized controlled trial is needed.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  arrest of descent; arrest of dilation; cesarean delivery; guidelines; labor management; maternal morbidity; neonatal morbidity

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29037483      PMCID: PMC5712240          DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.10.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0002-9378            Impact factor:   8.661


  38 in total

Review 1.  Why don't physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement.

Authors:  M D Cabana; C S Rand; N R Powe; A W Wu; M H Wilson; P A Abboud; H R Rubin
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1999-10-20       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  The natural history of the normal first stage of labor.

Authors:  Wayne R Cohen
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 7.661

3.  Evaluation and Management of Women and Newborns With a Maternal Diagnosis of Chorioamnionitis: Summary of a Workshop.

Authors:  Rosemary D Higgins; George Saade; Richard A Polin; William A Grobman; Irina A Buhimschi; Kristi Watterberg; Robert M Silver; Tonse N K Raju
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 7.661

4.  Practice-based research--"Blue Highways" on the NIH roadmap.

Authors:  John M Westfall; James Mold; Lyle Fagnan
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2007-01-24       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Contemporary patterns of spontaneous labor with normal neonatal outcomes.

Authors:  Jun Zhang; Helain J Landy; D Ware Branch; Ronald Burkman; Shoshana Haberman; Kimberly D Gregory; Christos G Hatjis; Mildred M Ramirez; Jennifer L Bailit; Victor H Gonzalez-Quintero; Judith U Hibbard; Matthew K Hoffman; Michelle Kominiarek; Lee A Learman; Paul Van Veldhuisen; James Troendle; Uma M Reddy
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 7.661

6.  Severe maternal morbidity among delivery and postpartum hospitalizations in the United States.

Authors:  William M Callaghan; Andreea A Creanga; Elena V Kuklina
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 7.661

7.  Statistical aspects of modeling the labor curve.

Authors:  Jun Zhang; James Troendle; Katherine L Grantz; Uma M Reddy
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2015-04-16       Impact factor: 8.661

8.  Misguided guidelines for managing labor.

Authors:  Wayne R Cohen; Emanuel A Friedman
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2015-04-17       Impact factor: 8.661

9.  Neonatal and maternal outcomes with prolonged second stage of labor.

Authors:  S Katherine Laughon; Vincenzo Berghella; Uma M Reddy; Rajeshwari Sundaram; Zhaohui Lu; Matthew K Hoffman
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 7.661

10.  Using a simplified Bishop score to predict vaginal delivery.

Authors:  S Katherine Laughon; Jun Zhang; James Troendle; Liping Sun; Uma M Reddy
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 7.623

View more
  8 in total

1.  The transition from latent to active labor and adverse obstetrical outcomes.

Authors:  Joshua I Rosenbloom; Candice L Woolfolk; Leping Wan; Molly J Stout; Methodius G Tuuli; George A Macones; Alison G Cahill
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2019-05-30       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  The Role of Labor Induction in Racial Disparities in Cesarean Delivery.

Authors:  Xi Wang; David Walsh; Jenifer E Allsworth
Journal:  Mo Med       Date:  2021 May-Jun

3.  Diagnostic accuracy of the partograph alert and action lines to predict adverse birth outcomes: a systematic review.

Authors:  M Bonet; O T Oladapo; J P Souza; A M Gülmezoglu
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2019-08-18       Impact factor: 6.531

4.  Influence of the second stage of labor on maternal and neonatal outcomes in vaginal births after caesarean section: a multicenter study in Germany.

Authors:  G Gitas; L Proppe; A K Ertan; S Baum; A Rody; M Kocaer; K Dinas; L Allahqoli; A S Laganà; A Sotiriadis; S Sommer; I Alkatout
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2021-05-04       Impact factor: 3.007

5.  Epidural analgesia during labor and its optimal initiation time-points: A real-world study on 400 Chinese nulliparas.

Authors:  Ying Zha; Xun Gong; Chengwu Yang; Dongrui Deng; Ling Feng; Ailin Luo; Li Wan; Fuyuan Qiao; Wanjiang Zeng; Suhua Chen; Yuanyuan Wu; Dongji Han; Haiyi Liu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-03-05       Impact factor: 1.817

6.  Impact of labor characteristics on maternal and neonatal outcomes of labor: A machine-learning model.

Authors:  Sherif A Shazly; Bijan J Borah; Che G Ngufor; Vanessa E Torbenson; Regan N Theiler; Abimbola O Famuyide
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-08-22       Impact factor: 3.752

7.  Risk factors, changes in serum inflammatory factors, and clinical prevention and control measures for puerperal infection.

Authors:  Hongbi Song; Keli Hu; Xuyuan Du; Jiao Zhang; Shu Zhao
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  2019-12-28       Impact factor: 3.124

8.  The impact of stage of labor on adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes in multiparous women: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Li Wang; Hongxia Wang; Lu Jia; Wenjie Qing; Fan Li; Jie Zhou
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2020-10-07       Impact factor: 3.007

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.