The effect of fundal pressure at Caesarean section on maternal haemodynamics

Evaluation of the risk prediction model of pressure injuries in hospitalized patient: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The main aim of this study is to synthesize the prevalent predictive models for pressure injuries in hospitalized patients, with the goal of identifying common predictive factors linked to pressure injuries in hospitalized patients. This endeavour holds the potential to provide clinical nurses with a valuable reference for providing targeted care to high-risk patients.

BACKGROUND

Pressure injuries (PIs) are a frequently occurring health problem throughout the world. There are mounting studies about risk prediction model of PIs reported and published. However, the prediction performance of the models is still unclear.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis: The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science and Chinese databases including CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure), Wanfang Database, Weipu Database and CBM (China Biology Medicine).

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted following PRISMA recommendations. The databases of Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and CNKI, Weipu Database, Wanfang Database and CBM were searched for all studies published before September 2023. We included studies with cohort, case-control designs, reporting the development of risk model and have been validated externally and internally among the hospitalized patients. Two researchers selected the retrieved studies according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and critically evaluated the quality of studies based on the CHARMS checklist. The PRISMA guideline was used to report the systematic review and meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Sixty-two studies were included, which contained 99 pressure injuries risk prediction models. The AUC (area under ROC curve) of modelling in 32 prediction models were reported ranged from .70 to .99, while the AUC of verification in 38 models were reported ranged from .70 to .98. Gender (OR = 1.41, CI: .99 ~ 1.31), age (WMD = 8.81, CI: 8.11 ~ 9.57), diabetes mellitus (OR = 1.64, CI: 1.36 ~ 1.99), mechanical ventilation (OR = 2.71, CI: 2.05 ~ 3.57), length of hospital stay (WMD = 7.65, CI: 7.24 ~ 8.05) were the most common predictors of pressure injuries.

CONCLUSION

Studies of PIs risk prediction model in hospitalized patients had high research quality, and the risk prediction models also had good predictive performance. However, some of the included studies lacked of internal or external validation in modelling, which affected the stability and extendibility. The aged, male patient in ICU, albumin, haematocrit, low haemoglobin level, diabetes, mechanical ventilation and length of stay in hospital were high-risk factors for pressure injuries in hospitalized patients. In the future, it is recommended that clinical nurses, in practice, select predictive models with better performance to identify high-risk patients based on the actual situation and provide care targeting the high-risk factors to prevent the occurrence of diseases.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The risk prediction model is an effective tool for identifying patients at the risk of developing PIs. With the help of risk prediction tool, nurses can identify the high-risk patients and common predictive factors, predict the probability of developing PIs, then provide specific preventive measures to improve the outcomes of these patients.

REGISTRATION NUMBER (PROSPERO)

CRD42023445258.

Subclavian vein ultrasound-guided fluid management to prevent post-spinal anesthetic hypotension during cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Hypotension frequently occurs after spinal anesthesia during cesarean delivery, and fluid loading is recommended for its prevention. We evaluated the efficacy of subclavian vein (SCV) ultrasound (US)-guided volume optimization in preventing hypotension after spinal anesthesia during cesarean delivery.

METHODS

This randomized controlled study included 80 consecutive full-term parturients scheduled for cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia. The women were randomly divided into the SCVUS group, with SCVUS analysis before spinal anesthesia with SCVUS-guided volume management, and the control group without SCVUS assessment. The SCVUS group received 3 mL/kg crystalloid fluid challenges repeatedly within 3 min with a 1-min interval based on the SCV collapsibility index (SCVCI), while the control group received a fixed dose (10 mL/kg). Incidence of post-spinal anesthetic hypotension was the primary outcome. Total fluid volume, vasopressor dosage, changes in hemodynamic parameters, maternal adverse effects, and neonatal status were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

The total fluid volume was significantly higher in the control group than in the SCVUS group (690 [650-757.5] vs. 160 [80-360] mL, p < 0.001), while the phenylephrine dose (0 [0-40] vs. 0 [0-30] µg, p = 0.276) and incidence of post-spinal anesthetic hypotension (65% vs. 60%, p = 0.950) were comparable between both the groups. The incidence of maternal adverse effects, including nausea/vomiting and bradycardia (12.5% vs. 17.5%, p = 0.531 and 7.5% vs. 5%, p = 1.00, respectively), and neonatal outcomes (Apgar scores) were comparable between the groups. SCVCI correlated with the amount of fluid administered (R = 0.885, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

SCVUS-guided volume management did not ameliorate post-spinal anesthetic hypotension but reduced the volume of the preload required before spinal anesthesia. Reducing preload volume did not increase the incidence of maternal and neonatal adverse effects nor did it increase the total vasopressor dose. Moreover, reducing preload volume could relieve the heart burden of parturients, which has high clinical significance.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry at chictr.org.cn (registration number, ChiCTR2100055050) on December 31, 2021.

Kristeller maneuvers or fundal pressure and maternal/neonatal morbidity: obstetric and judicial literature review

AIM

A significant amount of data concerning maternal-fetal damage arising from the exertion of Kristeller maneuvers (KMs) or fundal pressure (FP) go unreleased due to medicolegal implications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For this reason, the paper gathers information as to the real magnitude of litigation related to FP-induced damages and injuries. The authors have undertaken a research in order to include general search engines (PubMed-Medline, Cochrane, Embase, Google, GyneWeb) and legal databases (De Jure, Italian database of jurisprudence daily update; Westlaw, Thomson Reuters, American ruling database and Bailii, UK Court Ruling Database).

RESULTS

Results confirm said phenomenon to be more wide ranging than it appears through official channels. Several courts of law, both in the United States of America (USA) and in European Union (EU) Member States as well, have ruled against the use of the maneuver itself, assuming a stance conducive to a presumption of guilt against those doctors and healthcare providers who resorted to KMs or FP during deliveries. Given how rife FP is in mainstream obstetric practice, it is as if there were a wide gap between obstetric real-life and what official jurisprudence and healthcare institutions-sanctioned official practices are.

CONCLUSION

The authors think that it would be desirable to draft specifically targeted guidelines or recommendations on maneuvers during vaginal delivery, in which to point out exactly what kinds of maneuvering techniques are to be absolutely banned and what maneuvers are to be allowed, and under what conditions their application can be considered appropriate.