Comparing adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes in primary caesarean delivery during first versus second-stage of labour in Kenya: An institution-based cohort study
PLoS ONE, ISSN: 1932-6203, Vol: 18, Issue: 11 November, Page: e0294266
2023
- 15Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Captures15
- Readers15
- 15
Article Description
Background As caesarean delivery rates continue to increase globally, so are the number of second-stage caesarean deliveries. Second-stage caesareans may carry additional risk of complications for both the mother and fetus owing to fetal head impaction into the maternal pelvis and manipulations required for delivery. So far, data on this procedure’s outcomes from low resource countries are limited. Objectives To compare adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes between second-stage and first-stage of labour intrapartum primary caesarean deliveries over 12 months at a tertiary referral obstetric hospital in Kenya. Methods In a hospital-based cohort study, 222 women with singleton, cephalic presenting fetuses at term gestation who had intrapartum primary caesarean delivery during active labour were recruited post-partum. Second-stage caesarean deliveries (73) were compared to 149 first-stage caesarean deliveries. The proportion of caesarean deliveries in the second-stage of labour was estimated and the adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes were compared. The study was conducted from August 2021 to July 2022 at the Moi Teaching and Referral Hospital, Eldoret. Results The proportion of second-stage caesarean deliveries among intrapartum primary caesarean deliveries was 4.3% [95% CI: 2.9% - 4.7%]. Compared to first-stage caesarean deliveries, second-stage caesarean deliveries had a significantly higher risk of adverse maternal outcomes (RR 3.272, 95% CI 2.28–4.71, P < 0.001), including intraoperative trauma, atony, blood transfusion, and a postoperative hospital stay of more than three days. Additionally, there was a higher risk of adverse perinatal outcomes (RR 2.748, 95% CI 2.45–4.50, P < 0.001), including increased risk of a 5-min APGAR ≤3, admission to NBU, and neonatal death. Conclusions An increased risk of adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes is associated with primary second-stage caesarean deliveries compared to primary first-stage caesarean deliveries.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85178501270&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0294266; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38011095; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0294266; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0294266; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0294266
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know