Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Use of ICD-10 codes to monitor uterine rupture: validation of a national birth registry.
Thisted, Dorthe L A; Mortensen, Laust H; Hvidman, Lone; Rasmussen, Steen C; Larsen, Torben; Krebs, Lone.
Afiliação
  • Thisted DL; Dept. of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Copenhagen, Holbaek Hospital, Holbaek, Denmark. Electronic address: thiding@yahoo.dk.
  • Mortensen LH; Social Medicine, Dept. of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
  • Hvidman L; Dept. of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Aarhus University Hospital, Skejby, Aarhus, Denmark.
  • Rasmussen SC; Obstetric Research Unit, Dept. of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
  • Larsen T; Dept. of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Copenhagen, Holbaek Hospital, Holbaek, Denmark.
  • Krebs L; Dept. of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Copenhagen, Holbaek Hospital, Holbaek, Denmark.
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol ; 173: 23-8, 2014 Feb.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24287285
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES:

Uterine rupture is a rare but severe complication in pregnancies after a previous cesarean section. In Denmark, the monitoring of uterine rupture is based on reporting of relevant diagnostic codes to the Danish Medical Birth Registry (MBR). The aim of our study was to examine the validity of registration of uterine rupture in the MBR within the population of pregnant women with prior cesarean section by conducting a review of the medical records. STUDY

DESIGN:

We reviewed 1709 medical records within the population of singleton pregnant woman delivering at term between 1997 and 2007. We retrieved the medical records of all women in the MBR with a code for uterine rupture during labor regardless of whether or not a prior cesarean section had been reported to the registry. In addition medical records of all women with a code for previous cesarean section and delivery of a child with adverse perinatal outcome were retrieved.

RESULTS:

Among women recorded in the MBR with a previous cesarean section and uterine rupture, only 60.4% actually had a uterine rupture (partial or complete). At least 16.2% of complete uterine ruptures were not reported to the registry. Considering only complete uterine ruptures, the sensitivity and specificity of the codes for uterine rupture were 83.8% and 99.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSION:

During the study period the monitoring of uterine rupture in the MBR was inadequate.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Bases de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Ruptura Uterina / Sistema de Registros / Classificação Internacional de Doenças / Nascimento Vaginal Após Cesárea Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Pregnancy País/Região como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Revista: Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol Ano de publicação: 2014 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Bases de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Ruptura Uterina / Sistema de Registros / Classificação Internacional de Doenças / Nascimento Vaginal Após Cesárea Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Pregnancy País/Região como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Revista: Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol Ano de publicação: 2014 Tipo de documento: Article