4.4 Article

Revisit of risk factors for major obstetric hemorrhage: insights from a large medical center

Journal

ARCHIVES OF GYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICS
Volume 292, Issue 4, Pages 819-828

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00404-015-3725-y

Keywords

Emergent obstetrics; Hysterectomy; Maternal morbidity; Obstetric hemorrhage

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To revisit risk factors of major obstetric hemorrhage in a large obstetric center. A retrospective case control study was conducted based on institutional electronic database and blood bank registry of a single center, 2005-2014. The major obstetric hemorrhage event was defined as transfusion of a parts per thousand yen5 red blood cells units within 48 h of birth and compared to matched group (ratio 1:4) based on the time of birth. Multivariable stepwise backward logistic regression models were fitted to determine risk factors for major obstetric hemorrhage. Odds ratio (OR), further evaluated by standard measures of the predictive accuracy of the logistic regression models, C statistics, and associated neonatal adverse outcome are reported. 113,342 women delivered during the study; 122 (0.1 %) women experienced major obstetric hemorrhage. There was one major obstetric hemorrhage fatality (0.8 %). Compared to the controls, we identified historical as well as significant current modifiable risk factors for major obstetric hemorrhage: multifetal pregnancy (OR 3.92; 95 % CI 1.34-11.52; p = 0.013), induction of labor (OR 2.81; 95 % CI 1.22-7.05; p = 0.027), cesarean section (OR 25.56; 95 % CI 12.88-50.75; p < 0.001), and instrumental delivery (OR 6.58; 95 % CI 2.36-18.3; p < 0.001). C statistics of the model for major obstetric hemorrhage prediction was 0.919 (95 % CI 0.890-0.948, p < 0.001). Major obstetric hemorrhage is a rare event with potentially modifiable risk factors which represent a platform of interventions for lessening obstetric morbidity.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available