10 research outputs found

    External cephalic version beginning at 34 weeks' gestation versus 37 weeks' gestation: A randomized multicenter trial

    No full text
    Caroline Crowther is listed as a member of the Early External Cephalic Version Trial Grouphttp://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/623277/description#descriptio

    Factors associated with adverse perinatal outcome in the Term Breech Trial

    No full text
    Caroline Crowther is listed as a member of the Term Breech Trial Collaborative GroupMin Su, Lynne McLeod, Susan Ross, Andrew Willan, Walter J Hannah, Eileen Hutton, Sheila Hewson; Mary E Hannah for The Term Breech Trial Collaborative Grouphttp://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/623277/description#descriptio

    Outcomes at 3 Months After Planned Cesarean vs Planned Vaginal Delivery for Breech Presentation at Term

    No full text
    Caroline Crowther is listed as a member of the Term Breech Trial 3-Month Follow-up Collaborative Group in the article.Mary E. Hannah; Walter J. Hannah; Ellen D. Hodnett; Beverley Chalmers; Rose Kung; Andrew Willan; Kofi Amankwah; Mary Cheng; Michael Helewa; Sheila Hewson; Saroj Saigal; Hilary Whyte; Amiram Gafni; for the Term Breech Trial 3-Month Follow-up Collaborative Grou

    Maternal outcomes at 2 years after planned cesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: The international randomized Term Breech Trial

    No full text
    Caroline Crowther is a contributor to the 2-year maternal follow-up Term Breech Trial Collaborative GroupMary E. Hannah, Hilary Whyte, Walter J. Hannah, Sheila Hewson, Kofi Amankwah, Mary Cheng, Amiram Gafni, Patricia Guselle, Michael Helewa, Ellen D. Hodnett, Eileen Hutton, Rose Kung, Darren McKay, Susan Ross, Saroj Saigal, Andrew Willan, for the 2-year maternal follow-up Term Breech Trial Collaborative Grou

    Outcomes of children at 2 years after planned cesarean birth versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: The international randomized Term Breech Trial.

    No full text
    Caroline Crowther is listed as a contributor to the 2 year infant follow-up Term Breech Trial Collaborative GroupHilary Whyte, Mary E. Hannah, Saroj Saigal, Walter J. Hannah, Sheila Hewson, Kofi Amankwah, Mary Cheng, Amiram Gafni, Patricia Guselle, Michael Helewa, Ellen D. Hodnett, Eileen Hutton, Rose Kung, Darren McKay, Susan Ross, Andrew Willan, for the 2-year infant follow-up Term Breech Trial Collaborative Grouphttp://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/623277/description#descriptio

    The costs of planned cesarean versus planned vaginal birth in the Term Breech Trial

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: The Term Breech Trial compared the safety of planned cesarean and planned vaginal birth for breech presentations at term. The combined outcome of perinatal or neonatal death and serious neonatal morbidity was found to be significantly lower among babies delivered by planned cesarean section. In this study we conducted a cost analysis of the 2 approaches to breech presentations at delivery. METHODS: We used a third-party–payer (i.e., Ministry of Health) perspective. We included all costs for physician services and all hospital-related costs incurred by both the mother and the infant. We collected health care utilization and outcomes for all study participants during the trial. We used only the utilization data from countries with low national rates of perinatal death (≤ 20/1000). Seven hospitals across Canada (4 teaching and 3 community centres) were selected for unit cost calculations. RESULTS: The estimated mean cost of a planned cesarean was significantly lower than that of a planned vaginal birth (7165v.7165 v. 8042 per mother and infant; mean difference –877,95877, 95% credible interval –1286 to –473).Theestimatedmeancostofaplannedcesareanwaslowerthanthatofaplannedvaginalbirthforbothwomenhavingafirstbirth(473). The estimated mean cost of a planned cesarean was lower than that of a planned vaginal birth for both women having a first birth (7255 v. 8440)andwomenhavinghadatleastonepriorbirth(8440) and women having had at least one prior birth (7071 v. $7559). Although the treatment effect was largest in the subgroup of women having their first child, there was no statistically significant interaction between treatment and parity since the 95% credible intervals for difference in treatment effects between parity equalling zero and parity of one or greater all include zero. INTERPRETATION: Planned cesarean section was found to be less costly than planned vaginal birth for the singleton fetus in a breech presentation at term in the Term Breech Trial

    Mothers' Views ofTheir Childbirth Experiences 2 Years Mter Planned Caesarean Versus Planned Vaginal Birth for Breech Presentation at Term, in the International Randomized Term Breech Trial

    No full text
    Objective: To compare mothers' views at 2 years postpartum after participation in a randomized trial of planned Caesarean and planned vaginal birth for a singleton fetus in breech presentation at term.Study Design: In selected centres in the Term Breech Trial, mothers completed a structured questionnaire at approximately 2 years postpartum to assess their likes and dislikes about their childbirth experiences and their views about their intrapartum care and care providers.Results: Of 1159 mothers from 85 centres, 917 (79.1%) completed a follow-up questionnaire at 2 years postpartum. Baseline information was similar for both the planned Caesarean and planned vaginal birth groups. Planned Caesarean was associated with less worry about the baby's health (P < 0.001 ). While other differences were noted in likes and dislikes about their childbirth experiences, women's evaluations of the quality of intrapartum care, the helpfulness of staff, and their involvement in decision-making did not differ in the planned Caesarean delivery and planned vaginal birth groups.Conclusion: Planned mode of delivery influences aspects of women's evaluations of their childbirth experiences but does not affect evaluations of the quality of intrapartum care, support from care providers, or amount of involvement in decision-making

    A randomized trial of planned cesarean or vaginal delivery for twin pregnancy

    No full text
    Background: Twin birth is associated with a higher risk of adverse perinatal outcomes than singleton birth. It is unclear whether planned cesarean section results in a lower risk of adverse outcomes than planned vaginal delivery in twin pregnancy.\ud \ud Methods: We randomly assigned women between 32 weeks 0 days and 38 weeks 6 days of gestation with twin pregnancy and with the first twin in the cephalic presentation to planned cesarean section or planned vaginal delivery with cesarean only if indicated. Elective delivery was planned between 37 weeks 5 days and 38 weeks 6 days of gestation. The primary outcome was a composite of fetal or neonatal death or serious neonatal morbidity, with the fetus or infant as the unit of analysis for the statistical comparison.\ud \ud Results: A total of 1398 women (2795 fetuses) were randomly assigned to planned cesarean delivery and 1406 women (2812 fetuses) to planned vaginal delivery. The rate of cesarean delivery was 90.7% in the planned-cesarean-delivery group and 43.8% in the planned-vaginal-delivery group. Women in the planned-cesarean-delivery group delivered earlier than did those in the planned-vaginal-delivery group (mean number of days from randomization to delivery, 12.4 vs. 13.3; P = 0.04). There was no significant difference in the composite primary outcome between the planned-cesarean-delivery group and the planned-vaginal-delivery group (2.2% and 1.9%, respectively; odds ratio with planned cesarean delivery, 1.16; 95% confidence interval, 0.77 to 1.74; P = 0.49).\ud \ud Conclusion: In twin pregnancy between 32 weeks 0 days and 38 weeks 6 days of gestation, with the first twin in the cephalic presentation, planned cesarean delivery did not significantly decrease or increase the risk of fetal or neonatal death or serious neonatal morbidity, as compared with planned vaginal delivery

    Postoperative continuous positive airway pressure to prevent pneumonia, re-intubation, and death after major abdominal surgery (PRISM): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

    Get PDF
    Background: Respiratory complications are an important cause of postoperative morbidity. We aimed to investigate whether continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) administered immediately after major abdominal surgery could prevent postoperative morbidity. Methods: PRISM was an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial done at 70 hospitals across six countries. Patients aged 50 years or older who were undergoing elective major open abdominal surgery were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive CPAP within 4 h of the end of surgery or usual postoperative care. Patients were randomly assigned using a computer-generated minimisation algorithm with inbuilt concealment. The primary outcome was a composite of pneumonia, endotracheal re-intubation, or death within 30 days after randomisation, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received CPAP. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN56012545. Findings: Between Feb 8, 2016, and Nov 11, 2019, 4806 patients were randomly assigned (2405 to the CPAP group and 2401 to the usual care group), of whom 4793 were included in the primary analysis (2396 in the CPAP group and 2397 in the usual care group). 195 (8\ub71%) of 2396 patients in the CPAP group and 197 (8\ub72%) of 2397 patients in the usual care group met the composite primary outcome (adjusted odds ratio 1\ub701 [95% CI 0\ub781-1\ub724]; p=0\ub795). 200 (8\ub79%) of 2241 patients in the CPAP group had adverse events. The most common adverse events were claustrophobia (78 [3\ub75%] of 2241 patients), oronasal dryness (43 [1\ub79%]), excessive air leak (36 [1\ub76%]), vomiting (26 [1\ub72%]), and pain (24 [1\ub71%]). There were two serious adverse events: one patient had significant hearing loss and one patient had obstruction of their venous catheter caused by a CPAP hood, which resulted in transient haemodynamic instability. Interpretation: In this large clinical effectiveness trial, CPAP did not reduce the incidence of pneumonia, endotracheal re-intubation, or death after major abdominal surgery. Although CPAP has an important role in the treatment of respiratory failure after surgery, routine use of prophylactic post-operative CPAP is not recommended
    corecore