首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Reproduction, Contraception, Obstetrics and Gynecology >A comparative study of maternal outcome between vacuum extraction and outlet forceps delivery
【24h】

A comparative study of maternal outcome between vacuum extraction and outlet forceps delivery

机译:真空抽气与出口镊子分娩产妇结局的比较研究

获取原文
           

摘要

Background: Instrumental delivery is an art that is fading and may disappear in the near future as more and more obstetricians are resorting to caesarean sections. Instrumental vaginal deliveries comprise the use of vacuum assisted devices and /or forceps to assist in delivering a fetus, offering the alternative to accomplish vaginal delivery in properly selected cases thereby reducing maternal morbidity in terms of blood loss and increase hospital stay which is a consequence of cesarean sections. The objective of the present study is to compare the maternal morbidity with vacuum and outlet forceps delivery. Methods: A prospective comparative study was conducted in women delivering at department of obstetrics and gynaecology, in SDUMC, R L Jalappa Hospital, Kolar from March 2016 - March 2017 for a period of one year. A minimum of 180 patients were taken up for study. 90 women delivered by outlet forceps delivery and 90 women by vacuum delivery. Cases which require instrumental vaginal delivery and fulfilling the inclusion criteria for forceps or vacuum were taken up for the study, after taking informed consent. Maternal outcomes including episiotomy wound and extension, perineal tear, post-partum hemorrhage, hospital stay was analyzed and compared. Results: Mostly forceps and vacuum were applied for age group of 26-30 years and primigravida, which showed a statistical significance. Extension of episiotomy was more with forceps that is 21.1% and with vacuum being 4.4%. This difference was statistically significant. Postpartum hemorrhage was also more common in forceps group that is 13.3%compared to vacuum 11.1% but the difference was not statistically significant. The need for blood transfusion was seen more in cases of forceps that is 11.1% cases whereas in vacuum i.e. 6.7% cases but was not statistically significant. Conclusions: With the expertise and appropriate decision on the indication and meticulous handling of the instrument whether outlet forceps or vacuum, especially in a tertiary care centre, the maternal outcome is equally good with both the instruments.
机译:背景:器械交付是一门正在逐渐消失的艺术,随着越来越多的妇产科医生采用剖腹产术,器械交付在不久的将来可能会消失。器械阴道分娩包括使用真空辅助设备和/或钳子帮助递送胎儿的,提供替代实现在适当选择的情况下,由此减少失血和增加住院方面产妇的发病率,其是的结果阴道分娩剖宫产。本研究的目的是比较产妇发病率与真空钳和出口钳的分娩情况。方法:从2016年3月至2017年3月,在Kolar R Jalappa医院SDUMC的妇产科妇科进行了一项前瞻性比较研究,为期一年。至少有180名患者被接受研究。 90名妇女通过出口镊子分娩,90名妇女通过真空分娩。在征得知情同意后,接受需要阴道阴道分娩并满足钳子或真空的纳入标准的病例进行研究。分析并比较了孕妇的结局,包括会阴切开和伸展,会阴撕裂,产后出血,住院时间。结果:26-30岁年龄组和初产妇多采用镊子和真空吸管,具有统计学意义。钳子的表皮切开术的扩展更多,为21.1%,真空度为4.4%。这种差异具有统计学意义。钳组产后出血也较常见,为13.3%,而真空组为11.1%,但差异无统计学意义。在钳子中,输血的需求更多,为11.1%,而在真空中,即6.7%,但无统计学意义。结论:凭借对器械的指示和精心处理(无论是出口镊子还是真空器械)的专业知识和适当的决策,尤其是在三级护理中心,两种器械的产妇结局均相同。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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