Randomised trial of planned caesarean section prior to versus after 39 weeks: unscheduled deliveries and facility logistics--a secondary analysis

Julie Glavind, Tine Brink Henriksen, Sara Fevre Kindberg, Niels Uldbjerg, Julie Glavind, Tine Brink Henriksen, Sara Fevre Kindberg, Niels Uldbjerg

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the impact of scheduling caesarean section prior to versus after 39 completed weeks of gestation on the occurrence of unscheduled caesarean section and rescheduling of the procedure.

Methods: Secondary analysis from a multicentre randomised open-label trial including singleton pregnant women with a healthy foetus and a reliable due date. Women were allocated by computerized telephone randomisation to planned caesarean section at 38 weeks and three days or 39 weeks and three days. The outcomes were unscheduled deliveries with provided reasons, such as spontaneous labour onset or supervening complications, and any changes in the scheduled delivery date. Statistical analyses were according to intention-to-treat using Fisher's exact test.

Results: From March 2009 to June 2011 1,274 women were included. Median difference in gestational age at delivery was six days. Compared to the 38 weeks group, the women in the 39 weeks group were more likely to have an unscheduled caesarean section (15.2% vs. 9.3%; RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.21; 2.22), to deliver between 6 pm and 8 am (10 % vs. 6%; RR 1.68, 95% CI 1.14; 2.47), or to have the procedure rescheduled (36.7% vs. 23%; RR 1.6, 95% CI 1.34;1.90).

Conclusions: Scheduling caesarean section after 39 weeks leads to a 60% increase in unscheduled caesarean sections and a 70% increase in delivery outside regular work hours as compared to scheduling of the procedure prior to 39 weeks.

Trial registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT00835003 http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00835003?term=NCT00835003&rank=1.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1. CONSORT flow chart.
Figure 1. CONSORT flow chart.
*Participants were defined as compliant if a caesarean section was performed within the randomisation group dates or at any other date due to labour or complications in pregnancy.

References

    1. Hansen AK, Wisborg K, Uldbjerg N, Henriksen TB (2008) Risk of respiratory morbidity in term infants delivered by elective caesarean section: Cohort study. BMJ 336: 85-87. doi:10.1136/. PubMed: .
    1. Morrison JJ, Rennie JM, Milton PJ (1995) Neonatal respiratory morbidity and mode of delivery at term: Influence of timing of elective caesarean section. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 102: 101-106. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.1995.tb09060.x. PubMed: .
    1. Zanardo V, Simbi AK, Franzoi M, Soldà G, Salvadori A et al. (2004) Neonatal respiratory morbidity risk and mode of delivery at term: Influence of timing of elective caesarean delivery. Acta Paediatr 93: 643-647. doi:10.1111/j.1651-2227.2004.tb02990.x. PubMed: .
    1. Wilmink FA, Hukkelhoven CW, Lunshof S, Mol BW, van der Post JA et al. (2010) Neonatal outcome following elective cesarean section beyond 37 weeks of gestation: A 7-year retrospective analysis of a national registry. Am J Obstet Gynecol 202: 250.e1-250.e8 PubMed: .
    1. Tita AT, Landon MB, Spong CY, Lai Y, Leveno KJ et al. (2009) Timing of elective repeat cesarean delivery at term and neonatal outcomes. N Engl J Med 360: 111-120. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0803267. PubMed: .
    1. Chiossi G, Lai Y, Landon MB, Spong CY, Rouse DJ et al. (2013) Timing of delivery and adverse outcomes in term singleton repeat cesarean deliveries. Obstet Gynecol 121: 561-569. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182822193. PubMed: .
    1. Ertuğrul S, Gün I, Müngen E, Muhçu M, Kılıç S et al. (2013) Evaluation of neonatal outcomes in elective repeat cesarean delivery at term according to weeks of gestation. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 39: 105-112. doi:10.1111/j.1447-0756.2012.01951.x. PubMed: .
    1. Wetta L, Tita AT (2012) Early term births: Considerations in management. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 39: 89-97. doi:10.1016/j.ogc.2011.12.002. PubMed: .
    1. Reddy UM, Bettegowda VR, Dias T, Yamada-Kushnir T, Ko CW et al. (2011) Term pregnancy: A period of heterogeneous risk for infant mortality. Obstet Gynecol 117: 1279-1287. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182179e28. PubMed: .
    1. Gurol-Urganci I, Cromwell DA, Edozien LC, Onwere C, Mahmood TA et al. (2011) The timing of elective caesarean delivery between 2000 and 2009 in england. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 11: 43-2393-11-43 PubMed: .
    1. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) (2011). Caesarean Section. 2012
    1. Ojidu JI (1999) Delaying planned caesarean delivery until 39 completed weeks of gestation: The experience of a district general hospital. J Obstet Gynaecol 19: 142-145. doi:10.1080/01443619965444. PubMed: .
    1. Glavind J, Kindberg SF, Uldbjerg N, Khalil M, Møller A et al. (2013) Elective caesarean section at 38 weeks versus 39 weeks: Neonatal and maternal outcomes in a randomised controlled trial. BJOG 120: 1123-1132. doi:10.1111/1471-0528.12278. PubMed: .
    1. Bergsjø P, Denman DW 3rd, Hoffman HJ, Meirik O (1990) Duration of human singleton pregnancy. A population-based study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 69: 197-207. doi:10.3109/00016349009028681. PubMed: .
    1. Smith GC (2001) Use of time to event analysis to estimate the normal duration of human pregnancy. Hum Reprod 16: 1497-1500. doi:10.1093/humrep/16.7.1497. PubMed: .
    1. Richardson BS, Czikk MJ, daSilva O, Natale R (2005) The impact of labor at term on measures of neonatal outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 192: 219-226. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2004.06.034. PubMed: .
    1. Pallasmaa N, Ekblad U, Aitokallio-Tallberg A, Uotila J, Raudaskoski T et al. (2010) Cesarean delivery in finland: Maternal complications and obstetric risk factors. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 89: 896-902. doi:10.3109/00016349.2010.487893. PubMed: .
    1. Bergholt T, Stenderup JK, Vedsted-Jakobsen A, Helm P, Lenstrup C (2003) Intraoperative surgical complication during cesarean section: An observational study of the incidence and risk factors. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 82: 251-256. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0412.2003.00095.x. PubMed: .
    1. Allen VM, O'Connell CM, Baskett TF (2005) Maternal and perinatal morbidity of caesarean delivery at full cervical dilatation compared with caesarean delivery in the first stage of labour. BJOG 112: 986-990. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2005.00615.x. PubMed: .
    1. van Ham MA, van Dongen PW, Mulder J (1997) Maternal consequences of caesarean section. A retrospective study of intra-operative and postoperative maternal complications of caesarean section during a 10-year period. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 74: 1-6. doi:10.1016/S0301-2115(97)02725-5. PubMed: .
    1. Gould JB, Qin C, Chavez G (2005) Time of birth and the risk of neonatal death. Obstet Gynecol 106: 352-358. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000168627.33566.3c. PubMed: .
    1. Peled Y, Melamed N, Chen R, Pardo J, Ben-Shitrit G et al. (2011) The effect of time of day on outcome of unscheduled cesarean deliveries. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 24: 1051-1054. doi:10.3109/14767058.2010.545913. PubMed: .
    1. Bailit JL, Landon MB, Thom E, Rouse DJ, Spong CY et al. (2006) The MFMU cesarean registry: Impact of time of day on cesarean complications. Am J Obstet Gynecol 195: 1132-1137. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2006.06.009. PubMed: .
    1. Spong CY, Mercer BM, D'alton M, Kilpatrick S, Blackwell S et al. (2011) Timing of indicated late-preterm and early-term birth. Obstet Gynecol 118: 323-333. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182255999. PubMed: .
    1. Balchin I, Whittaker JC, Lamont RF, Steer PJ (2008) Timing of planned cesarean delivery by racial group. Obstet Gynecol 111: 659-666. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e318163cd55. PubMed: .

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores e Colaboradores

Condições médicas

Intervenções de drogas

3
Se inscrever