4.6 Article

The Active Implementation of Pregnancy Hypertension Guidelines in British Columbia

Journal

OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY
Volume 116, Issue 3, Pages 659-666

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181eb669d

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Michael Smith Foundation
  2. Canadian Institutes for Health Research
  3. Child and Family Research Institute

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE: To reduce maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality associated with the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy by using an active model of guideline implementation. METHODS: This study used a preintervention and postintervention cohort comparison design. We interrogated the British Columbia Perinatal Database Registry for 6 years of existing prospectively gathered data (fiscal years 2000-2001 to 2005-2006), introduced the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy guidelines, and assessed the incidence of the combined adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes for the next 2 years (fiscal years 2006-2007 and 2007-2008). The combined adverse maternal outcome was maternal death, life-threatening, or life-altering complications. The combined perinatal outcome included the severe complications of prematurity and hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy. RESULTS: Eighteen thousand seventy-six women were diagnosed with hypertensive disorder of pregnancy in British Columbia from 2000-2001 to 2007-2008. Outcomes were compared preguideline (n=13,150 deliveries) and postguideline (n=4,926 deliveries) implementation. The incidence of the combined adverse maternal outcome decreased from 3.1% to 1.9% (relative risk 0.60, 95% confidence interval 0.48-0.75). There was a concomitant fall in the incidence of the combined adverse perinatal outcome. CONCLUSION: The active introduction of standardized management of women with a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy is associated with reduced maternal and perinatal risk. (Obstet Gynecol 2010;116:659-66)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available