Suppr超能文献

学生助产士和助产士对失血量的估计是否存在差异?一项多中心横断面研究。

Do estimates of blood loss differ between student midwives and midwives? A multicenter cross-sectional study.

作者信息

Pranal Marine, Guttmann Aline, Ouchchane Lemlih, Parayre Ines, Rivière Olivier, Leroux Sylvie, Bonnefont Sylvie, Debost-Legrand Anne, Vendittelli Françoise

机构信息

Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Clermont-Ferrand, Pôle Femme et Enfant, Clermont-Ferrand, France; CNRS, SIGMA Clermont, Institut Pascal, Clermont Université, Clermont-Ferrand, France.

Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Clermont-Ferrand, Service de Biostatistique, Informatique Médicale et Technologies de la Communication, Clermont-Ferrand, France; UMR CNRS 6284, ISIT, Clermont Université, Université d'Auvergne, Clermont-Ferrand, France.

出版信息

Midwifery. 2018 Apr;59:17-22. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2017.12.017. Epub 2017 Dec 24.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

the principal objective of this study was to assess the quality of blood loss estimates by midwives and student midwives. The secondary objectives were: to assess the intraobserver agreement of visual blood estimates and the rate of underestimation of blood loss by participants, and to estimate the sensitivity, specificity, and negative likelihood ratio of these estimates for clinically pertinent blood losses (≥ 500mL and ≥ 1000mL).

DESIGN

multicenter cross-sectional study.

SETTING

thirty-three French maternity units and 35 French midwifery schools participated in this study.

PARTICIPANTS

volunteer French midwifery students (n = 463) and practicing midwives (n = 578).

INTERVENTION

an online survey showed 16 randomly ordered photographs of 8 different simulated blood quantities (100, 150, 200, 300, 500, 850, 1000, and 1500mL) with a reference 50-mL image in each photo and asked participants to estimate the blood loss. The visual blood loss estimates were compared with Fisher's exact test. Intraobserver agreement for these estimates was assessed with a weighted kappa coefficient, and the negative predictive values (probability of no hemorrhage when visual estimate was negative) were calculated from prevalence rates in the literature.

FINDINGS

of the 16,656 estimates obtained, 34.1% were accurate, 37.2% underestimated the quantity presented, and 28.7% overestimated it. Analyses of the intraobserver reproducibility between the two estimates of the same photograph showed that agreement was highest (weighted kappa ≥ 0.8) for the highest values (1000mL, 1500mL). For each volume considered, students underestimated blood loss more frequently than midwives. In both groups, the negative predictive values regarding postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) diagnosis (severe or not) were greater than 98%.

KEY CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

student midwives tended to underestimate the quantity of blood loss more frequently than the midwives. Postpartum hemorrhage (≥ 500mL) was always identified, but severe postpartum hemorrhage (≥ 1000mL) was identified in fewer than half the cases. These results should be taken into account in training both student midwives and practicing professionals.

摘要

目的

本研究的主要目的是评估助产士和助产专业学生对失血量估计的质量。次要目的是:评估视觉失血量估计的观察者内一致性以及参与者对失血量的低估率,并估计这些估计值对于临床相关失血量(≥500mL和≥1000mL)的敏感性、特异性和阴性似然比。

设计

多中心横断面研究。

地点

33家法国产科单位和35所法国助产学校参与了本研究。

参与者

法国助产专业志愿学生(n = 463)和执业助产士(n = 578)。

干预

一项在线调查展示了16张随机排序的照片,照片中有8种不同模拟血量(100、150、200、300、500、850、1000和1500mL),每张照片中都有一张50mL的参考图像,并要求参与者估计失血量。视觉失血量估计值通过Fisher精确检验进行比较。这些估计值的观察者内一致性通过加权kappa系数进行评估,阴性预测值(视觉估计为阴性时无出血的概率)根据文献中的患病率计算得出。

结果

在获得的16656次估计中,34.1%准确,37.2%低估了实际血量,28.7%高估了实际血量。对同一张照片的两次估计之间的观察者内再现性分析表明,对于最高值(1000mL、1500mL),一致性最高(加权kappa≥0.8)。对于每种血量,学生比助产士更频繁地低估失血量。在两组中,关于产后出血(PPH)诊断(严重或不严重)的阴性预测值均大于98%。

关键结论及对实践的启示

助产专业学生比助产士更频繁地倾向于低估失血量。产后出血(≥500mL)总能被识别出来,但严重产后出血(≥1000mL)在不到一半的病例中被识别出来。在培训助产专业学生和执业专业人员时应考虑这些结果。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验