Quantitative blood loss values reveal high rates of undiagnosed postpartum hemorrhage

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics Pub Date : 2025-03-01 DOI:10.1002/ijgo.70037
Burhan A. Khan, Alexandria Weston, Aubrey Jaeger, Gauri Shevatekar, Yanzhi Wang, Laura Smith, Kelvin E. Wynn
{"title":"Quantitative blood loss values reveal high rates of undiagnosed postpartum hemorrhage","authors":"Burhan A. Khan,&nbsp;Alexandria Weston,&nbsp;Aubrey Jaeger,&nbsp;Gauri Shevatekar,&nbsp;Yanzhi Wang,&nbsp;Laura Smith,&nbsp;Kelvin E. Wynn","doi":"10.1002/ijgo.70037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>In this study, we examined quantitative blood loss (QBL) values and postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) diagnoses in relation to clinical, demographic, and hospitalization related variables.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A retrospective chart review was conducted of deliveries at a regional hospital over a nine-month period, querying patient demographics, PPH diagnosis, blood loss, and hospital stay variables.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>PPH was substantially underdiagnosed by current USA guidelines (78%). Deliveries with &gt;1000 mL of blood loss were not diagnosed with PPH (78%), including 84% of cesarean deliveries. Deliveries with &gt;500 mL blood loss were not diagnosed with PPH (92%), including 89% of vaginal deliveries. There was no difference between estimated blood loss (EBL) and QBL levels for all deliveries (<i>P</i> = 0.9981); however, when separated by type of delivery, EBL was underestimated for vaginal deliveries (<i>P</i> = 0.02) and overestimated for cesarean deliveries (<i>P</i> = 0.02). PPH values were both associated with longer hospital stays (<i>P</i> &lt; 0.001), and higher cost of care (<i>P</i> &lt; 0.0001). Compared to Caucasian women, African American and Hispanic/Latina women had higher rates of PPH (<i>P</i> &lt; 0.001 and <i>P</i> &lt; 0.05, respectively).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Quantitative measurement of blood loss identified many cases of undiagnosed PPH. Additionally, African American and Hispanic/Latina women were more likely to be diagnosed with PPH.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":14164,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics","volume":"170 2","pages":"614-620"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ijgo.70037","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijgo.70037","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

In this study, we examined quantitative blood loss (QBL) values and postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) diagnoses in relation to clinical, demographic, and hospitalization related variables.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was conducted of deliveries at a regional hospital over a nine-month period, querying patient demographics, PPH diagnosis, blood loss, and hospital stay variables.

Results

PPH was substantially underdiagnosed by current USA guidelines (78%). Deliveries with >1000 mL of blood loss were not diagnosed with PPH (78%), including 84% of cesarean deliveries. Deliveries with >500 mL blood loss were not diagnosed with PPH (92%), including 89% of vaginal deliveries. There was no difference between estimated blood loss (EBL) and QBL levels for all deliveries (P = 0.9981); however, when separated by type of delivery, EBL was underestimated for vaginal deliveries (P = 0.02) and overestimated for cesarean deliveries (P = 0.02). PPH values were both associated with longer hospital stays (P < 0.001), and higher cost of care (P < 0.0001). Compared to Caucasian women, African American and Hispanic/Latina women had higher rates of PPH (P < 0.001 and P < 0.05, respectively).

Conclusion

Quantitative measurement of blood loss identified many cases of undiagnosed PPH. Additionally, African American and Hispanic/Latina women were more likely to be diagnosed with PPH.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
定量失血值显示,未确诊的产后出血率很高。
目的:在本研究中,我们研究了定量失血量(QBL)值和产后出血(PPH)诊断与临床、人口统计学和住院相关变量的关系。方法:对一家地区医院9个月的分娩进行回顾性图表回顾,查询患者人口统计学、PPH诊断、出血量和住院时间等变量。结果:根据目前的美国指南,PPH的诊断严重不足(78%)。失血量超过1000毫升的分娩未被诊断为PPH(78%),其中包括84%的剖宫产分娩。失血量为500ml的分娩未被诊断为PPH(92%),包括89%的阴道分娩。所有分娩的估计失血量(EBL)和QBL水平之间没有差异(P = 0.9981);然而,当按分娩类型分开时,阴道分娩的EBL被低估(P = 0.02),剖宫产的EBL被高估(P = 0.02)。PPH值均与较长的住院时间相关(P结论:定量测量失血量可识别许多未确诊的PPH病例。此外,非裔美国人和西班牙裔/拉丁裔妇女更有可能被诊断为PPH。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
2.60%
发文量
493
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics publishes articles on all aspects of basic and clinical research in the fields of obstetrics and gynecology and related subjects, with emphasis on matters of worldwide interest.
期刊最新文献
The role of fetal viability in perineal and anal sphincter injury: Insights from a large cohort study. Efficacy of energy-based devices on episiotomy pain and healing: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The price of parenting: Childcare and physician mothers. Iron deficiency with and without anemia in pregnancy: A scoping review of prevalence and perinatal impact. Issue Information
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1