Suppr超能文献

欧洲分娩方式存在巨大差异:来自欧洲围产期统计研究汇总常规数据的风险分层分析。

Wide differences in mode of delivery within Europe: risk-stratified analyses of aggregated routine data from the Euro-Peristat study.

作者信息

Macfarlane A J, Blondel B, Mohangoo A D, Cuttini M, Nijhuis J, Novak Z, Ólafsdóttir H S, Zeitlin J

机构信息

Centre for Maternal and Child Health Research, City University London, London, UK.

INSERM, Obstetrical Perinatal and Paediatric Epidemiology Research Team, Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics (U1153), Paris-Descartes University, Paris, France.

出版信息

BJOG. 2016 Mar;123(4):559-68. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.13284. Epub 2015 Mar 9.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To use data from routine sources to compare rates of obstetric intervention in Europe both overall and for subgroups at higher risk of intervention.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of aggregated routine data.

SETTING

Thirty-one European countries or regions contributing data on mode of delivery to the Euro-Peristat project.

POPULATION

Births in participating countries in 2010.

METHODS

Countries provided aggregated data about overall rates of obstetric intervention and about caesarean section rates for specified subgroups.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Mode of delivery.

RESULTS

Rates of caesarean section ranged from 14.8% to 52.2% of all births and rates of instrumental vaginal delivery ranged from 0.5% to 16.4%. Overall, there was no association between rates of instrumental vaginal delivery and rates of caesarean section, but similarities were observed between some countries that are geographically close and may share common traditions of practice. Associations were observed between caesarean section rates for women with breech and vertex births and with singleton and multiple births but patterns of association for women who had and had not had previous caesarean sections were more complex.

CONCLUSIONS

The persisting wide variations in caesarean section and instrumental vaginal delivery rates point to a lack of consensus about practice and raise questions for further investigation. Further research is needed to explore the impact of differences in clinical guidelines, healthcare systems and their financing and parents' and professionals' attitudes to care at delivery.

摘要

目的

利用常规来源的数据,比较欧洲整体及干预风险较高亚组的产科干预率。

设计

对汇总的常规数据进行回顾性分析。

背景

31个向欧洲围产期统计项目提供分娩方式数据的欧洲国家或地区。

研究对象

2010年参与国的分娩情况。

方法

各国提供了关于产科干预总体率及特定亚组剖宫产率的汇总数据。

主要观察指标

分娩方式。

结果

剖宫产率占所有分娩的比例在14.8%至52.2%之间,器械助产阴道分娩率在0.5%至16.4%之间。总体而言,器械助产阴道分娩率与剖宫产率之间无关联,但在地理位置相近且可能有共同实践传统的一些国家之间观察到了相似性。观察到臀位和头位分娩女性、单胎和多胎分娩女性的剖宫产率之间存在关联,但有过和未进行过剖宫产的女性的关联模式更为复杂。

结论

剖宫产率和器械助产阴道分娩率持续存在的广泛差异表明在实践方面缺乏共识,并引发了进一步调查的问题。需要进一步研究以探讨临床指南、医疗保健系统及其融资的差异以及父母和专业人员对分娩护理的态度所产生的影响。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验