Hung Man Wai Catherine, Lee Lin Tai Linus, Chiu Christopher Pak Hey, Ma Man Kee Teresa, Chan Yuen Yee Yannie, Kwong Lee Ting, Wong Eunice Joanna, Lai Theodora Hei Tung, Chan Oi Ka, So Po Lam, Lau Wai Lam, Leung Tak Yeung
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Kwong Wah Hospital, Kowloon, Hong Kong.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Hospital, Chai Wan, Hong Kong.
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2024 Oct;231(4):465.e1-465.e10. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2024.02.283. Epub 2024 Feb 24.
The incidence of second stage cesarean delivery has been rising globally because of the failure or the anticipated difficulty of performing instrumental delivery. Yet, the best way to interpret the figure and its optimal rate remain to be determined. This is because it is strongly influenced by the practice of other 2 modes of birth, namely cesarean delivery performed before reaching the second stage and assisted vaginal birth during the second stage. In this regard, a bubble chart that can display 3-dimensional data through its x-axis, y-axis, and the size of each plot (presented as a bubble) may be a suitable method to evaluate the relationship between the rates of these 3 modes of births.
This study aimed to conduct an epidemiologic study on the incidence of second stage cesarean deliveries rates among >300,000 singleton term births in 10 years from 8 obstetrical units and to compare their second stage cesarean delivery rates in relation to their pre-second stage cesarean delivery rates and assisted vaginal birth rates using a bubble chart.
The territory-wide birth data collected between 2009 and 2018 from all 8 public obstetrical units (labelled as A to H) were reviewed. The inclusion criteria were all singleton pregnancies with cephalic presentation that were delivered at term (≥37 weeks' gestation). Pre-second stage cesarean delivery rate was defined as all elective cesarean deliveries and those emergency cesarean deliveries that occurred before full cervical dilatation was achieved as a proportion of the total number of births. The second stage cesarean delivery rate and assisted vaginal birth rate were calculated according to the respective mode of delivery as a proportion of the number of cases that reached full cervical dilatation. The rates of these 3 modes of births were compared among the parity groups and among the 8 units. Using a bubble chart, each unit's second stage cesarean delivery rate (y-axis) was plotted against its pre-second stage cesarean delivery rate (x-axis) as a bubble. Each unit's second stage cesarean delivery to assisted vaginal birth ratio was represented by the size of the bubble.
During the study period, a total of 353,434 singleton cephalic presenting term pregnancies were delivered in the 8 units, and 180,496 (51.1%) were from nulliparous mothers. When compared with the multiparous group, the nulliparous group had a significantly lower pre-second stage cesarean delivery rate (18.58% vs 21.26%; P<.001) but a higher second stage cesarean delivery rate (0.79% vs 0.22%; P<.001) and a higher assisted vaginal birth rate (17.61% vs 3.58%; P<.001). Using the bubble of their averages as a reference point in the bubble chart, the 8 units' bubbles were clustered into 5 regions indicating their differences in practice: unit B and unit H were close to the average in the center. Unit A and unit F were at the upper right corner with a higher pre-second stage cesarean delivery rate and second stage cesarean delivery rate. Unit D and unit E were at the opposite end. Unit C was at the upper left corner with a low pre-second stage cesarean delivery rate but a high second stage cesarean delivery rate, whereas unit G was at the opposite end. Unit C and unit G were also in the extremes in terms of pre-second stage cesarean delivery to assisted vaginal birth ratio (0.09 and 0.01, respectively). Although some units seemed to have very similar second stage cesarean delivery rates, their obstetrical practices were differentiated by the bubble chart.
The second stage cesarean delivery rate must be evaluated in the context of the rates of pre-second stage cesarean delivery and assisted vaginal birth. A bubble chart is a useful method for analyzing the relationship among these 3 variables to differentiate the obstetrical practice between different units.
由于器械助产失败或预期困难,全球第二产程剖宫产的发生率一直在上升。然而,解释这一数据的最佳方式及其最佳发生率仍有待确定。这是因为它受到另外两种分娩方式的强烈影响,即在进入第二产程前进行的剖宫产以及在第二产程中进行的阴道助产。在这方面,一种可以通过x轴、y轴以及每个图块(以气泡表示)的大小来显示三维数据的气泡图,可能是评估这三种分娩方式发生率之间关系的合适方法。
本研究旨在对来自8个产科单位的超过30万例单胎足月分娩的第二产程剖宫产发生率进行流行病学研究,并使用气泡图比较它们的第二产程剖宫产率与第二产程前剖宫产率及阴道助产率之间的关系。
回顾了2009年至2018年期间从所有8个公立产科单位(标记为A至H)收集的全地区出生数据。纳入标准为所有单胎头先露且足月(≥37周妊娠)分娩的孕妇。第二产程前剖宫产率定义为所有择期剖宫产以及在宫颈完全扩张前发生的急诊剖宫产占总出生数的比例。第二产程剖宫产率和阴道助产率根据各自的分娩方式计算,占宫颈完全扩张病例数的比例。在不同产次组和8个单位之间比较这三种分娩方式的发生率。使用气泡图,将每个单位的第二产程剖宫产率(y轴)与第二产程前剖宫产率(x轴)作为气泡绘制。每个单位的第二产程剖宫产与阴道助产的比例由气泡大小表示。
在研究期间,8个单位共分娩了353,434例单胎头先露足月妊娠,其中180,496例(51.1%)来自初产妇。与经产妇组相比,初产妇组的第二产程前剖宫产率显著较低(18.58%对21.26%;P<0.001),但第二产程剖宫产率较高(0.79%对0.22%;P<0.001),阴道助产率也较高(17.61%对3.58%;P<0.001)。以气泡图中各单位平均值的气泡作为参考点,8个单位的气泡聚为5个区域,表明它们在实践中的差异:单位B和单位H接近中心的平均值。单位A和单位F位于右上角,第二产程前剖宫产率和第二产程剖宫产率较高。单位D和单位E位于另一端。单位C位于左上角,第二产程前剖宫产率低但第二产程剖宫产率高,而单位G位于另一端。单位C和单位G在第二产程前剖宫产与阴道助产的比例方面也处于极端(分别为0.09和0.01)。尽管一些单位的第二产程剖宫产率似乎非常相似,但气泡图区分了它们的产科实践。
第二产程剖宫产率必须结合第二产程前剖宫产率和阴道助产率来评估。气泡图是分析这三个变量之间关系以区分不同单位产科实践的有用方法。