TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of neonatal outcomes between category-1 & non-category-1 primary emergency cesarean section
T2 - A retrospective record review in a tertiary care hospital
AU - Dur-e-Shahwar,
AU - Ahmed, Iffat
AU - Amerjee, Azra
AU - Hoodbhoy, Zahra
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018, Professional Medical Publications. All rights reserved.
PY - 2018/7/1
Y1 - 2018/7/1
N2 - Objective: To compare neonatal outcomes between Category-1 and Non-Category-1 Primary Emergency Cesarean Section. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis, conducted at Aga Khan University Hospital Karachi from January 1st 2016 till December 31st 2016. Non-probability purposive sampling technique was used. A sample size of 375 patients who had primary Emergency Caesarean Section (Em-CS) was identified by keeping CS rate of 41.5% and 5% bond on error. Data was collected from labor ward, operating theatre and neonatal ward records by using structured questionnaire. Results: In the current study, out of 375 participants who underwent primary Em-CS; majority (89.3%) were booked cases. Two-hundred-eighty-two (75.2%) were primiparous women. Two hundred and thirty (61.3%) were at term and 145(38.7%) were preterm. The main indication among Category-1 CS was fetal distress (15.7%). For Non-Category-1 CS, non-progress of labour (45.1%) was the leading cause of abdominal delivery. Except for APGAR score at one minute (p value = 0.048), no other variables were statistically significant when neonatal outcomes were compared among Category 1 and Non-Category-1 CS. Conclusion: In this study, fetal distress and non-progress of labor were the main indications for Category-1 and Non-Category-1 CS respectively. We did not find statistically significant association between indications of Em CS and neonatal outcomes. However further prospective studies are required to confirm this association.
AB - Objective: To compare neonatal outcomes between Category-1 and Non-Category-1 Primary Emergency Cesarean Section. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis, conducted at Aga Khan University Hospital Karachi from January 1st 2016 till December 31st 2016. Non-probability purposive sampling technique was used. A sample size of 375 patients who had primary Emergency Caesarean Section (Em-CS) was identified by keeping CS rate of 41.5% and 5% bond on error. Data was collected from labor ward, operating theatre and neonatal ward records by using structured questionnaire. Results: In the current study, out of 375 participants who underwent primary Em-CS; majority (89.3%) were booked cases. Two-hundred-eighty-two (75.2%) were primiparous women. Two hundred and thirty (61.3%) were at term and 145(38.7%) were preterm. The main indication among Category-1 CS was fetal distress (15.7%). For Non-Category-1 CS, non-progress of labour (45.1%) was the leading cause of abdominal delivery. Except for APGAR score at one minute (p value = 0.048), no other variables were statistically significant when neonatal outcomes were compared among Category 1 and Non-Category-1 CS. Conclusion: In this study, fetal distress and non-progress of labor were the main indications for Category-1 and Non-Category-1 CS respectively. We did not find statistically significant association between indications of Em CS and neonatal outcomes. However further prospective studies are required to confirm this association.
KW - Ante-partum hemorrhage and malpresentation
KW - Category-1 caesarean section
KW - Fetal distress
KW - Non-progress of labour
KW - Primary emergency Caesarean section
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85052935029&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.12669/pjms.344.14496
DO - 10.12669/pjms.344.14496
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85052935029
SN - 1682-024X
VL - 34
SP - 823
EP - 827
JO - Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences
JF - Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences
IS - 4
ER -