分娩方式对新生儿颅内出血风险的影响

Nika Buh, M. Lučovnik
{"title":"分娩方式对新生儿颅内出血风险的影响","authors":"Nika Buh, M. Lučovnik","doi":"10.14528/snr.2019.53.3.751","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The objective of the study was to examine the association between the mode of delivery and the incidence of neonatal intracranial haemorrhage.Methods: Slovenian National Perinatal Information System (NPIS) data for the period 2002 through 2016 were analysed. Nulliparous women delivering singleton neonates in cephalic presentation weighting 2,500 to 4,000g were included. Incidence of neonatal intracranial haemorrhage in vacuum delivery vs. other modes of delivery was compared using the Chi-square test (p < 0.05 significant).Results: 125,393 deliveries were included: 5,438 (4 %) planned caesarean deliveries, 9,7764 (78 %) spontaneous vaginal deliveries, 15,577 (12 %) emergency caesarean deliveries, and 6,614 (5 %) vacuum extractions. 17 (0.14/1000) neonatal intracranial haemorrhages were recorded: 12 occurred in spontaneous vaginal deliveries, two in emergency caesarean deliveries, and three in vacuum extractions. In comparison to infants born by spontaneous vaginal delivery, those delivered by vacuum extraction had higher rates of intracranial haemorrhage (odds ratio (OR) 3.70; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04−13.10). Risk estimates did not reach statistical significance when comparing infants born by vacuum extraction and those born by emergency caesarean delivery (OR 3.54; 95% CI 0.59−21.16).Discussion and conclusion: Infants born by vacuum extraction have significantly higher rates of intracranial haemorrhage than those born by spontaneous vaginal delivery although the absolute risk is small. There are no significant differences in the rates of intracranial haemorrhage in vacuum extraction vs. emergency caesarean delivery.","PeriodicalId":32258,"journal":{"name":"Obzornik zdravstvene nege","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The impact of delivery mode on the risk of neonatal intracranial haemorrhage\",\"authors\":\"Nika Buh, M. Lučovnik\",\"doi\":\"10.14528/snr.2019.53.3.751\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: The objective of the study was to examine the association between the mode of delivery and the incidence of neonatal intracranial haemorrhage.Methods: Slovenian National Perinatal Information System (NPIS) data for the period 2002 through 2016 were analysed. Nulliparous women delivering singleton neonates in cephalic presentation weighting 2,500 to 4,000g were included. Incidence of neonatal intracranial haemorrhage in vacuum delivery vs. other modes of delivery was compared using the Chi-square test (p < 0.05 significant).Results: 125,393 deliveries were included: 5,438 (4 %) planned caesarean deliveries, 9,7764 (78 %) spontaneous vaginal deliveries, 15,577 (12 %) emergency caesarean deliveries, and 6,614 (5 %) vacuum extractions. 17 (0.14/1000) neonatal intracranial haemorrhages were recorded: 12 occurred in spontaneous vaginal deliveries, two in emergency caesarean deliveries, and three in vacuum extractions. In comparison to infants born by spontaneous vaginal delivery, those delivered by vacuum extraction had higher rates of intracranial haemorrhage (odds ratio (OR) 3.70; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04−13.10). Risk estimates did not reach statistical significance when comparing infants born by vacuum extraction and those born by emergency caesarean delivery (OR 3.54; 95% CI 0.59−21.16).Discussion and conclusion: Infants born by vacuum extraction have significantly higher rates of intracranial haemorrhage than those born by spontaneous vaginal delivery although the absolute risk is small. There are no significant differences in the rates of intracranial haemorrhage in vacuum extraction vs. emergency caesarean delivery.\",\"PeriodicalId\":32258,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Obzornik zdravstvene nege\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Obzornik zdravstvene nege\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14528/snr.2019.53.3.751\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Obzornik zdravstvene nege","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14528/snr.2019.53.3.751","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

引言:本研究的目的是探讨分娩方式与新生儿颅内出血发生率之间的关系。方法:分析斯洛文尼亚国家围产期信息系统(NPIS)2002年至2016年的数据。包括分娩头位单胎新生儿的产妇,体重2500至4000克。使用卡方检验比较了真空分娩与其他分娩方式下新生儿颅内出血的发生率(p<0.05显著性)。结果:125393次分娩包括:5438次(4%)计划剖腹产、97764次(78%)自然阴道分娩、15577次(12%)紧急剖腹产和6614次(5%)真空分娩。记录了17例(0.14/1000)新生儿颅内出血:12例发生在自发阴道分娩中,2例发生在紧急剖腹产中,3例发生在真空抽取中。与自然阴道分娩的婴儿相比,真空分娩的婴儿颅内出血率更高(比值比(OR)3.70;95%置信区间(CI)1.04−13.10)。在比较真空分娩和紧急剖腹产出生的婴儿时,风险估计没有达到统计学意义(OR 3.54;95%CI 0.59−21.16)。讨论和结论:真空分娩出生的婴儿颅内出血率明显高于自然阴道分娩出生的儿童尽管绝对风险很小。真空分娩和紧急剖腹产的颅内出血率没有显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The impact of delivery mode on the risk of neonatal intracranial haemorrhage
Introduction: The objective of the study was to examine the association between the mode of delivery and the incidence of neonatal intracranial haemorrhage.Methods: Slovenian National Perinatal Information System (NPIS) data for the period 2002 through 2016 were analysed. Nulliparous women delivering singleton neonates in cephalic presentation weighting 2,500 to 4,000g were included. Incidence of neonatal intracranial haemorrhage in vacuum delivery vs. other modes of delivery was compared using the Chi-square test (p < 0.05 significant).Results: 125,393 deliveries were included: 5,438 (4 %) planned caesarean deliveries, 9,7764 (78 %) spontaneous vaginal deliveries, 15,577 (12 %) emergency caesarean deliveries, and 6,614 (5 %) vacuum extractions. 17 (0.14/1000) neonatal intracranial haemorrhages were recorded: 12 occurred in spontaneous vaginal deliveries, two in emergency caesarean deliveries, and three in vacuum extractions. In comparison to infants born by spontaneous vaginal delivery, those delivered by vacuum extraction had higher rates of intracranial haemorrhage (odds ratio (OR) 3.70; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04−13.10). Risk estimates did not reach statistical significance when comparing infants born by vacuum extraction and those born by emergency caesarean delivery (OR 3.54; 95% CI 0.59−21.16).Discussion and conclusion: Infants born by vacuum extraction have significantly higher rates of intracranial haemorrhage than those born by spontaneous vaginal delivery although the absolute risk is small. There are no significant differences in the rates of intracranial haemorrhage in vacuum extraction vs. emergency caesarean delivery.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
Čustveno soočanje s posledicami življenjsko ogrožajočih zdravstvenih stanj Challenges to make patient engagement result in more sustainable pharmaceutical care Spolna zdravstvena pismenost slovenskih srednješolcev Vpliv porodnega položaja pri iztisu ploda na poškodbo presredka impact of an educational intervention on fertility awareness of healthcare professionals
×
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:481959085
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