首页> 外文OA文献 >Estimating the risk of adverse birth outcomes in pregnant women undergoing non-obstetric surgery using routinely collected NHS data: an observational study
【2h】

Estimating the risk of adverse birth outcomes in pregnant women undergoing non-obstetric surgery using routinely collected NHS data: an observational study

机译:使用常规收集的NHs数据估计接受非产科手术的孕妇的不良分娩结果风险:一项观察性研究

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

Background: Previous research suggests that non-obstetric surgery is carried out in 1 – 2% of all pregnancies. However, there is limited evidence quantifying the associated risks. Furthermore, of the evidence available, none relates directly to outcomes in the UK, and there are no current NHS guidelines regarding non-obstetric surgery in pregnant women. Objectives: To estimate the risk of adverse birth outcomes of pregnancies in which non-obstetric surgery was or was not carried out. To further analyse common procedure groups. Data Source: Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) maternity data collected between 2002 – 3 and 2011 – 12. Main outcomes: Spontaneous abortion, preterm delivery, maternal death, caesarean delivery, long inpatient stay, stillbirth and low birthweight. Methods: We utilised HES, an administrative database that includes records of all patient admissions and day cases in all English NHS hospitals. We analysed HES maternity data collected between 2002 – 3 and 2011 – 12, and identified pregnancies in which non-obstetric surgery was carried out. We used logistic regression models to determine the adjusted relative risk and attributable risk of non-obstetric surgical procedures for adverse birth outcomes and the number needed to harm. Results: We identified 6,486,280 pregnancies, in 47,628 of which non-obstetric surgery was carried out. In comparison with pregnancies in which surgery was not carried out, we found that non-obstetric surgery was associated with a higher risk of adverse birth outcomes, although the attributable risk was generally low. We estimated that for every 287 pregnancies in which a surgical operation was carried out there was one additional stillbirth; for every 31 operations there was one additional preterm delivery; for every 25 operations there was one additional caesarean section; for every 50 operations there was one additional long inpatient stay; and for every 39 operations there was one additional low-birthweight baby. Limitations: We have no means of disentangling the effect of the surgery from the effect of the underlying condition itself. Many spontaneous abortions will not be associated with a hospital admission and, therefore, will not be included in our analysis. A spontaneous abortion may be more likely to be reported if it occurs during the same hospital admission as the procedure, and this could account for the associated increased risk with surgery during pregnancy. There are missing values of key data items to determine parity, gestational age, birthweight and stillbirth. Conclusions: This is the first study to report the risk of adverse birth outcomes following non-obstetric surgery during pregnancy across NHS hospitals in England. We have no means of disentangling the effect of the surgery from the effect of the underlying condition itself. Our observational study can never attribute a causal relationship between surgery and adverse birth outcomes, and we were unable to determine the risk of not undergoing surgery where surgery was clinically indicated. We have some reservations over associations of risk factors with spontaneous abortion because of potential ascertainment bias. However, we believe that our findings and, in particular, the numbers needed to harm improve on previous research, utilise a more recent and larger data set based on UK practices, and are useful reference points for any discussion of risk with prospective patients. The risk of adverse birth outcomes in pregnant women undergoing non-obstetric surgery is relatively low, confirming that surgical procedures during pregnancy are generally safe. Future work: Further evaluation of the association of non-obstetric surgery and spontaneous abortion. Evaluation of the impact of non-obstetric surgery on the newborn (e.g. neonatal intensive care unit admission, prolonged length of neonatal stay, neonatal death). Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.
机译:背景:先前的研究表明,非妊娠外科手术占所有妊娠的1-2%。但是,有限的证据可以量化相关风险。此外,在现有证据中,没有一个与英国的结果直接相关,并且目前没有关于孕妇非产科手术的NHS指南。目的:评估进行或未进行非产科手术的孕妇不良分娩结果的风险。进一步分析通用程序组。数据来源:2002年3月至2011年12月之间收集的医院病情统计(HES)产妇数据。主要结果:自然流产,早产,产妇死亡,剖腹产,住院时间长,死产和低出生体重。方法:我们使用了HES,这是一个管理数据库,其中包含所有英国NHS医院的所有患者入院和日间病例的记录。我们分析了2002年3月至2011年12月之间收集的HES产妇数据,并确定了进行非产科手术的妊娠。我们使用逻辑回归模型确定了非产科手术对不良出生结局的调整后相对风险和可归因风险,以及伤害所需的数字。结果:我们确定了6,486,280例怀孕,其中47,628例进行了非产科手术。与未进行手术的孕妇相比,我们发现非产科手术与不良分娩结果的风险较高,尽管可归因的风险通常较低。我们估计,在进行外科手术的每287例怀孕中,还有一个死胎。每31项手术中就有1项早产。每25例手术中就有一次剖腹产。每进行50次手术,住院时间就会增加1次。每进行39次手术,就会再增加一个低体重婴儿。局限性:我们没有办法将手术的效果与潜在疾病本身的效果区分开。许多自然流产不会与入院有关,因此不会包括在我们的分析中。如果自然流产发生在与该手术相同的住院期间,则更有可能被报告,这可以解释怀孕期间手术带来的相关风险增加。缺少关键数据项的值来确定胎次,胎龄,出生体重和死产。结论:这是英国NHS医院中首例报告妊娠期间非产科手术后不良分娩结果风险的研究。我们没有办法将手术的效果与潜在疾病本身的效果区分开。我们的观察性研究永远不能归因于手术与不良出生结局之间的因果关系,并且我们无法确定临床上指示手术的不进行手术的风险。由于潜在的确定性偏倚,我们对危险因素与自然流产的关联有一些保留。但是,我们认为我们的发现,特别是需要损害的数字在以前的研究中有所改善,利用了基于英国实践的更新和更大的数据集,并且对于与潜在患者进行风险讨论是有用的参考点。接受非产科手术的孕妇发生不良分娩结果的风险相对较低,这证实了怀孕期间的手术程序通常是安全的。未来的工作:进一步评估非产科手术与自然流产的关系。评估非产科手术对新生儿的影响(例如新生儿重症监护病房入院,新生儿住院时间延长,新生儿死亡)。资金来源:美国国立卫生研究院健康服务与交付研究计划。

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