17 research outputs found

    Failure to perform assisted deliveries is resulting in an increased neonatal and maternal morbidity and mortality: An expert opinion

    Get PDF
    The need to perform assisted vaginal delivery (AVD) has been regarded as self-evident. In high-income countries, rates of AVD range between 5% and 20% of all births. In South Africa, the rate of AVD is only 1%. This has resulted in increased neonatal morbidity and mortality due to intrapartum asphyxia, and increased maternal morbidity and mortality due to a rise in second-stage caesarean deliveries. In this article, we address the possible causes leading to a decrease in AVD and propose measures to be taken to increase the rates of AVD and subsequently reduce morbidity and mortality

    Effect of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Pregnancy on Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes in Africa: An AFREhealth Call for Evidence through Multicountry Research Collaboration

    Get PDF
    In the African context, there is a paucity of data on SARS-CoV-2 infection and associated COVID-19 in pregnancy. Given the endemicity of infections such as malaria, HIV, and tuberculosis (TB) in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), it is important to evaluate coinfections with SARS-CoV-2 and their impact on maternal/infant outcomes. Robust research is critically needed to evaluate the effects of the added burden of COVID-19 in pregnancy, to help develop evidence-based policies toward improving maternal and infant outcomes. In this perspective, we briefly review current knowledge on the clinical features of COVID-19 in pregnancy; the risks of preterm birth and cesarean delivery secondary to comorbid severity; the effects of maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection on the fetus/neonate; and in utero mother-to-child SARS-CoV-2 transmission. We further highlight the need to conduct multicountry surveillance as well as retrospective and prospective cohort studies across SSA. This will enable assessments of SARS-CoV-2 burden among pregnant African women and improve the understanding of the spectrum of COVID-19 manifestations in this population, which may be living with or without HIV, TB, and/or other coinfections/comorbidities. In addition, multicountry studies will allow a better understanding of risk factors and outcomes to be compared across countries and subregions. Such an approach will encourage and strengthen much-needed intra-African, south-to-south multidisciplinary and interprofessional research collaborations. The African Forum for Research and Education in Health's COVID-19 Research Working Group has embarked upon such a collaboration across Western, Central, Eastern and Southern Africa

    WHO next generation partograph: revolutionary steps towards individualised labour care.

    Get PDF
    In 1972, two landmark papers in this journal described the partograph,1,2 a chart designed to provide finite referral criteria for midwives working in peripheral clinics who needed to refer women in labour to Harare Hospital, Zimbabwe (then Rhodesia). This innovation coincided with influential reports from the National Maternity Hospital in Dublin of the 'active management of labour' (early amniotomy, proactive use of oxytocin and one-to-one nursing care) with the objective of achieving birth within a limited time frame.3 The partograph was globally adopted, and has been used as part of the assessment of labour progress for nearly half a century. It was recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) in the early 1990s as a routine tool for displaying the progress of labour. Despite its global acceptance, utilization and correct completion rates as low as 31% and 3% respectively, have been reported

    Instruments for assisted vaginal birth

    Get PDF
    Background Assisted vaginal births are carried out to expedite birth for the benefit of mothers and babies but are sometimes associated with significant morbidity for both. Various instruments are available, broadly divided into forceps and vacuum cups, and choice may be influenced by clinical circumstances, operator preference, experience and availability. Objectives To evaluate the different instruments in terms of success in achieving a vaginal birth, and the risk of morbidity for mother and baby. Search methods We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (14 May 2021), and reference lists of retrieved studies. Selection criteria We selected randomised controlled trials of assisted vaginal birth using different instruments. The review did not include quasi-randomised trials, cluster-randomised trials or cross-over designs. The review included trials for which abstracts alone were available as long as there was sufficient information to assess eligibility. Data collection and analysis We used standard Cochrane methods. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence. The main outcomes assessed included failed delivery with allocated instrument, any maternal trauma, third- and fourth-degree tears, postpartum haemorrhage, any neonatal trauma, low Apgar and low umbilical artery pH. Main results We included 31 studies involving a total of 5754 women. Risk of bias criteria were largely assessed as 'unclear', due to a lack of detail in trial reports. Blinding would have been challenging for all trials due to their inability to conceal the type of instrument used from either the woman or the operator, which is reflected in the risk of bias assessment. Any type of forceps versus any type of vacuum cup (12 studies, 3129 women) Forceps may be less likely to fail in achieving vaginal birth: risk ratio (RR) 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39 to 0.88; 11 studies, 3080 women; low certainty. 'Any maternal trauma' may be slightly more likely with forceps: odds ratio (OR) 1.53, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.40; 5 studies, 1356 women; low certainty; and third- or fourth-degree tears may also be more likely with forceps: RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.55; 9 studies, 2493 women; low certainty. There is no evidence of a difference in the incidence of postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) between the two groups: RR 1.71, 95% CI 0.59 to 4.95; 2 studies, 523 women; low certainty, because the evidence is very imprecise due to a very wide CI. More women in the forceps group reported requiring pain relief. There is probably no evidence of difference in rates of low Apgar: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.51; 7 studies, 1644 women; moderate certainty; or low umbilical artery pH in the forceps group compared to any vacuum: RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.93; 2 studies, 789 women; low certainty; both of these outcomes are imprecise and have wide CIs that include both benefit and harm. There were also lower rates of fetal trauma with 'any forceps' (cephalhematoma, retinal haemorrhage and jaundice). The composite outcome of 'any neonatal trauma' was not reported. Low-cavity forceps versus any vacuum cup (2 studies, 218 women) We included two small studies with 218 participants in this comparison, but we judged most of the evidence as very low certainty, hence it was not feasible to make judgements on the difference in the rates of failed delivery, any maternal trauma or third- and fourth- degree tears. PPH and low umbilical artery pH were not reported. Soft vacuum cup versus any rigid cup (9 studies, 1148 women) Failed delivery may be more likely in the soft vacuum cup group: RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.21 to 2.17; 9 studies, 1148 women; low certainty. There may be no difference in the rates of 'any maternal trauma': OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.67; 2 studies, 348 women; low certainty, but the confidence interval is wide, indicating possible benefit or harm. There may be no difference in the rates of third- or fourth-degree tears: RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.44; 4 studies, 619 women; low certainty. There is probably no difference in the rates of PPH: RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.61; 5 studies, 737 women; moderate certainty between the soft and rigid cup groups. There may be little or no difference in the incidence of low Apgar scores: RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.37; 9 studies, 1148; low certainty; or low umbilical artery pH: RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.36; 1 study, 100 women; low certainty. Handheld vacuum versus any vacuum cup (4 studies, 968 women) There may be no difference in the rates of failures with allocated instrument: RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.25; 4 studies, 962 women; low certainty, any maternal trauma: OR 1.16, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.88; 2 studies; 394 women; low certainty, PPH: RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.92; 1 study, 164 women; low certainty, low umbilical artery pH: RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.59; 1 study, 164 women; low certainty, or low Apgar scores: RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.34 to 4.61; 3 studies, 784 women; low certainty) between the two groups. There is probably no difference in the rates of third- or fourth-degree tears between the 'handheld vacuum' and 'any vacuum cup' groups: RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.62 to 2.12; 4 studies, 962 women; moderate certainty. Authors' conclusions This review provides low-certainty evidence that forceps may be more likely to achieve vaginal birth and have lower rates of fetal trauma, but at a greater risk of perineal trauma and higher pain relief requirements compared with vacuum cups. There was low-certainty evidence that rigid vacuum cups may be more likely to achieve a vaginal birth than soft cups but with more fetal trauma, whilst handheld vacuum cups had similar success rates compared to other cups. There was no evidence of a difference in the rates of third- or fourth-degree tears or postpartum haemorrhages between types of cups, but wide confidence intervals around the estimates indicate further research is needed in this area

    Failure to perform assisted deliveries is resulting in an increased neonatal and maternal morbidity and mortality : an expert opinion

    Get PDF
    CITATION: Pattinson, R. C. et al. 2018. Failure to perform assisted deliveries is resulting in an increased neonatal and maternal morbidity and mortality : an expert opinion. South African Medical Journal, 108(2):75-78, doi:10.7196/SAMJ.2018.v108i2.12786.The original publication is available at http://www.samj.org.zaThe need to perform assisted vaginal delivery (AVD) has been regarded as self-evident. In high-income countries, rates of AVD range between 5% and 20% of all births. In South Africa, the rate of AVD is only 1%. This has resulted in increased neonatal morbidity and mortality due to intrapartum asphyxia, and increased maternal morbidity and mortality due to a rise in second-stage caesarean deliveries. In this article, we address the possible causes leading to a decrease in AVD and propose measures to be taken to increase the rates of AVD and subsequently reduce morbidity and mortality.http://www.samj.org.za/index.php/samj/article/view/12199Publisher's versio

    Prevalence of abnormal umbilical arterial flow on Doppler ultrasound in low-risk and unselected pregnant women: a systematic review

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: While Doppler ultrasound screening is beneficial for women with high-risk pregnancies, there is insufficient evidence on its benefits and harms in low- and unselected-risk pregnancies. This may be related to fewer events of abnormal Doppler flow, however the prevalence of absent or reversed end diastolic flow (AEDF or REDF) in such women is unknown. In this systematic review, we aimed to synthesise available data on the prevalence of AEDF or REDF. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL and Global Index Medicus with no date, setting or language restrictions. All randomized or non-randomized studies reporting AEDF or REDF prevalence based on Doppler assessment of umbilical arterial flow > 20 weeks' gestation were eligible. Two authors assessed eligibility and extracted data on primary (AEDF and REDF) and secondary (fetal, perinatal, and neonatal mortality, caesarean section) outcomes, with results presented descriptively. RESULTS: A total of 42 studies (18,282 women) were included. Thirty-six studies reported zero AEDF or REDF cases. However, 55 AEDF or REDF cases were identified from just six studies (prevalence 0.08% to 2.13%). Four of these studies were in unselected-risk women and five were conducted in high-income countries. There was limited evidence from low- and middle-income countries. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from largely observational studies in higher-income countries suggests that AEDF and REDF are rare among low- and unselected-risk pregnant women. There are insufficient data from lower-income countries and further research is required
    corecore