首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings >Trial of labor versus elective repeat cesarean section for the women with a previous cesarean section: a decision analysis.
【2h】

Trial of labor versus elective repeat cesarean section for the women with a previous cesarean section: a decision analysis.

机译:对先前有剖宫产的妇女进行分娩与选择性重复剖宫产的试验:决策分析。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

In order to reduce the cesarean-delivery rate, more and more pregnant women are offered trials of labor (TOL) after their previous cesarean sections. TOL and elective repeat cesarean section (ERCS) have different risks and benefits. We constructed a decision analysis to explore this issue. Probabilities were derived from literature reviews. Health state utilities were derived from the authors' clinical judgement. The analysis considered the disutility of the procedures and the disutilities of the morbidity. Using the baseline assumption, ERCS was superior to TOL. One-way sensitivity analyses showed that the result was insensitive to all of the probability estimates and the disutilities of the morbidity. However, the result was sensitive to the patient's preference for ERCS, successful TOL, or failed TOL. The analysis indicates that the best delivery method for a woman who has had a previous cesarean section depends on patient's preference. More patients' preference studies are needed.
机译:为了降低剖宫产率,越来越多的孕妇在其先前的剖宫产手术后接受了分娩试验。 TOL和选择性重复剖宫产(ERCS)具有不同的风险和收益。我们构造了一个决策分析来探讨这个问题。概率来自文献综述。健康状态实用程序是根据作者的临床判断得出的。分析考虑了程序的无效性和发病率的无效性。使用基线假设,ERCS优于TOL。单向敏感性分析表明,该结果对所有概率估计和发病率的无效性均不敏感。但是,结果对患者对ERCS的偏好,成功的TOL或失败的TOL敏感。分析表明,对于曾经做过剖腹产的妇女而言,最佳分娩方法取决于患者的喜好。需要更多的患者偏爱研究。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号