Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Maternal and neonatal morbidity associated with Fetal Pillow® use at full dilatation caesarean: A retrospective cohort.
Sadler, Lynn C; Thompson, John M D; Alsweiler, Jane M; McKinlay, Christopher J D; Cronin, Robin; Browne, Erena; Baillie-Bellew, Thea; Harvey, Amanda D; Hill, Meghan G.
Afiliação
  • Sadler LC; Women's Health, Te Whatu Ora Te Toka Tumai, Auckland, New Zealand.
  • Thompson JMD; Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
  • Alsweiler JM; Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
  • McKinlay CJD; Department of Paediatrics, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
  • Cronin R; Department of Paediatrics, University of Auckland, Te Whatu Ora, Auckland, New Zealand.
  • Browne E; Department of Paediatrics, University of Auckland, Te Whatu Ora Counties Manukau, Auckland, New Zealand.
  • Baillie-Bellew T; Department of Women's Health, Te Whatu Ora Counties Manukau, Auckland, New Zealand.
  • Harvey AD; Te Whatu Ora Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.
  • Hill MG; Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.
BJOG ; 131(9): 1240-1248, 2024 Aug.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38287196
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

To investigate associations of the Fetal Pillow® with maternal and neonatal morbidity.

DESIGN:

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING:

Two tertiary maternity units, New Zealand. POPULATION OR SAMPLE Full dilatation singleton, term, cephalic caesarean section, with three comparisons at Unit A (1) before versus after introduction of the Fetal Pillow® (1 Jaunary 2016-31 October 2021); (2) with versus without the Fetal Pillow® after introduction (27 July 2017-31 October 2021); and (3) between Unit A and Unit B during the same time period (1 January 2019-31 October 2021). The Fetal Pillow® is unavailable at Unit B.

METHODS:

Cases were ascertained and clinical data were extracted from electronic clinical databases and records. Outcome data were adjusted and presented as adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% CI. MAIN OUTCOME

MEASURES:

Primary outcome "any" uterine incision extension; secondary outcomes included major extension (into adjacent structures), and a composite neonatal outcome.

RESULTS:

In all, 1703 caesareans were included; 375 with the device and 1328 without. Uterine incision extension rates were at Unit A before versus after

introduction:

26.8% versus 24.8% (aOR 0.88, 95% CI 0.65-1.19); at Unit A with the Fetal Pillow® versus without 26.1% versus 23.8% (aOR 1.14, 95% CI 0.83-1.57); and at Unit A versus Unit B 24.2% versus 29.2% (aOR 0.73, 95% CI 0.54-0.99). No differences were found in major extensions, or neonatal composite outcome.

CONCLUSIONS:

Despite the relatively large size of this study, it could not rule out either a positive or a negative association between use of the Fetal Pillow® and uterine extensions, major uterine incision extensions, and neonatal morbidity. Randomised controlled trial evidence is required to assess efficacy.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Cesárea Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Newborn / Pregnancy País/Região como assunto: Oceania Idioma: En Revista: BJOG Assunto da revista: GINECOLOGIA / OBSTETRICIA Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Nova Zelândia

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Cesárea Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Newborn / Pregnancy País/Região como assunto: Oceania Idioma: En Revista: BJOG Assunto da revista: GINECOLOGIA / OBSTETRICIA Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Nova Zelândia