Caesarean Section frequency in Nulliparous Women induced at 39 weeks versus conventional management: An open label random allocation study.

IF 1.2 4区医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL

Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.12669/pjms.40.8.9099

Erum Majid, Bader Faiyaz Zuberi, Kanwal Gul, Hira Jam, Gul Haseena

{"title":"Caesarean Section frequency in Nulliparous Women induced at 39 weeks versus conventional management: An open label random allocation study.","authors":"Erum Majid, Bader Faiyaz Zuberi, Kanwal Gul, Hira Jam, Gul Haseena","doi":"10.12669/pjms.40.8.9099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To compare frequency of caesarean section in singleton primary-para women induced at 39 week and its comparison with conventional management. The other objective was comparison of perinatal and neonatal outcomes.Method: Open random allocation study was conducted at Gynae/Obst Department JPMC during period from 1st June 2022 to 30th September 2023. Primiparous women with singleton pregnancy without risk factors with gestational age 38 weeks 0 days to 38 weeks six days attending the anti-natal clinic offered to participate after consent. Non-probability convenience sampling method was used for induction. Randomization was done using random number table into one of the two groups, Group-A in which induction was done at 39 weeks while in Group-B induction was done conventionally. Mean age ±SD, gestational age and delivery time was calculated and compared by Student's t test. Frequency of CS, perinatal and neonatal outcomes was compared by χ2 test.Results: Eighty-two women were inducted in Group-A and eighty-five in Group-B. The mean delivery time in Group-A was significantly more at 8.12±2.77 hours while in Group-B was 7.0±2.62 hours (p = .005). Frequency of CS between two groups was not statistically significant, it was 5 (6.1%) in Group-A and 2 (2.4%) in Group-B (p = 0.412). No significant difference in frequency of NICU admission was seen, in Group-A 8.54% babies were admitted to NICU while in Group-B 16.47% were admitted to NICU (p = 0.122).Conclusion: No significant difference was observed in frequencies of CS, Foetal, Neonatal, and Maternal outcomes.","PeriodicalId":19958,"journal":{"name":"Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11395340/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.40.8.9099","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare frequency of caesarean section in singleton primary-para women induced at 39 week and its comparison with conventional management. The other objective was comparison of perinatal and neonatal outcomes.

Method: Open random allocation study was conducted at Gynae/Obst Department JPMC during period from 1^st June 2022 to 30^th September 2023. Primiparous women with singleton pregnancy without risk factors with gestational age 38 weeks 0 days to 38 weeks six days attending the anti-natal clinic offered to participate after consent. Non-probability convenience sampling method was used for induction. Randomization was done using random number table into one of the two groups, Group-A in which induction was done at 39 weeks while in Group-B induction was done conventionally. Mean age ±SD, gestational age and delivery time was calculated and compared by Student's t test. Frequency of CS, perinatal and neonatal outcomes was compared by χ² test.

Results: Eighty-two women were inducted in Group-A and eighty-five in Group-B. The mean delivery time in Group-A was significantly more at 8.12±2.77 hours while in Group-B was 7.0±2.62 hours (p = .005). Frequency of CS between two groups was not statistically significant, it was 5 (6.1%) in Group-A and 2 (2.4%) in Group-B (p = 0.412). No significant difference in frequency of NICU admission was seen, in Group-A 8.54% babies were admitted to NICU while in Group-B 16.47% were admitted to NICU (p = 0.122).

Conclusion: No significant difference was observed in frequencies of CS, Foetal, Neonatal, and Maternal outcomes.

查看原文本刊更多论文

39 周引产与常规处理相比，无阴道妇女的剖腹产频率：一项开放标签随机分配研究。

目的比较 39 周引产的单胎初产妇剖腹产的频率，以及与常规处理方法的比较。另一个目的是比较围产期和新生儿的预后：方法：2022 年 6 月 1 日至 2023 年 9 月 30 日期间，在 JPMC 妇产科进行了开放式随机分配研究。无风险因素的单胎妊娠初产妇，孕龄为 38 周 0 天至 38 周 6 天，在征得同意后前往产前门诊就诊。诱导采用非概率方便抽样法。使用随机数字表随机分为两组，A 组在 39 周时进行引产，B 组则按常规进行引产。计算平均年龄（±SD）、胎龄和分娩时间，并通过学生 t 检验进行比较。CS 发生率、围产期和新生儿结局通过 χ2 检验进行比较：结果：A 组有 82 名产妇，B 组有 85 名产妇。A 组的平均分娩时间为（8.12±2.77）小时，明显高于 B 组（7.0±2.62）小时（P = .005）。两组间的 CS 发生率无统计学意义，A 组为 5（6.1%）次，B 组为 2（2.4%）次（P = 0.412）。入住新生儿重症监护室的频率无明显差异，A 组有 8.54% 的婴儿入住新生儿重症监护室，而 B 组有 16.47% 的婴儿入住新生儿重症监护室（P = 0.122）：结论：CS、胎儿、新生儿和产妇结局的发生率无明显差异。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences 医学-医学：内科

CiteScore

4.10

自引率

9.10%

发文量

363

审稿时长

3-6 weeks

期刊介绍： It is a peer reviewed medical journal published regularly since 1984. It was previously known as quarterly "SPECIALIST" till December 31st 1999. It publishes original research articles, review articles, current practices, short communications & case reports. It attracts manuscripts not only from within Pakistan but also from over fifty countries from abroad. Copies of PJMS are sent to all the import medical libraries all over Pakistan and overseas particularly in South East Asia and Asia Pacific besides WHO EMRO Region countries. Eminent members of the medical profession at home and abroad regularly contribute their write-ups, manuscripts in our publications. We pursue an independent editorial policy, which allows an opportunity to the healthcare professionals to express their views without any fear or favour. That is why many opinion makers among the medical and pharmaceutical profession use this publication to communicate their viewpoint.