Decision-to-delivery interval in suspected placental abruption – association with pregnancy outcome

A Retrospective Review of Decision to Delivery Time Interval for Foetal Distress at a Central Hospital

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to describe the trajectory of emergency caesarean deliveries for foetal distress at Chris Hani Baragwanath Academic Hospital (CHBAH).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective, contextual, descriptive study, using consecutive convenience sampling was done reviewing all the records of emergency caesarean deliveries for foetal distress at CHBAH in February 2019 until a minimum sample size of 385 was reached.

RESULTS

During the study period, a total of 617 caesarean deliveries were done, of which 572 (92.7%) were emergencies. Foetal distress accounted for 395 (69.1%) of the emergency caesarean deliveries. No emergency caesarean delivery for foetal distress conformed to the 30-minute DDI and the mean (SD) DDI was 411 (291) minutes. The mean (SD) 5-minute and 10-minute Apgar scores were 8.4 (1.6) and 9.6 (1.3), respectively. There was a significant difference between the type of anaesthetic (general or neuraxial), with those receiving general anaesthesia having shorter anaesthetic start to cut time (p=0.0110). However, those delivered following neuraxial anaesthesia had better 5-minute (p=0.0002) and 10-minute (p=0.0175) Apgar scores.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that a DDI of 30-minutes, was not achieved at CHBAH during the study period. Most babies diagnosed with foetal distress pre-delivery had 5-minute and 10-minute Apgar scores inconsistent with this diagnosis. This over-diagnosis of foetal distress in some cases could have led to delays in delivery of babies who had actual foetal distress and where a 30-minute DDI could have improved outcome.

Defining the decision-to-delivery interval at caesarean section: narrative literature review and proposal for standardisation

The decision-to-delivery interval is a widely used term at non-elective caesarean section. While the definition may appear self-evident, there is no universally agreed consensus about when this period begins and ends. We reviewed the literature for original research utilising the terms 'decision-to-delivery', 'decision-to-incision' or 'incision-to-delivery' and examined definitions used for decision, delivery, incision, as well as any additional time intervals that were assessed. Our analysis demonstrated an inconsistent non-standardised approach to defining these intervals, which might have clinical practice and medicolegal ramifications. We propose that the decision-to-delivery interval should be defined as follows: the interval between the time at which the senior obstetrician makes the decision that a caesarean section is required and the time at which the fetus (or first fetus in the case of multiples) is delivered. The decision time should ideally be recorded contemporaneously in the medical notes or partogram.

Simulation training is useful for shortening the decision-to-delivery interval in cases of emergent cesarean section

OBJECTIVE

We examined the effect of simulation training for medical staff on the decision-to-delivery interval (DDI) in cases of emergent cesarean delivery and the effect of a shortened DDI on maternal and neonatal outcomes.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Our hospital is a tertiary perinatal center. As the simulation training was performed in March 2014, the study population was divided into two groups: pretraining group (November 2011-March 2014, 29 months: n = 15) and post-training group (April 2014-August 2016, 29 months: n = 35).

RESULTS

The DDI was significantly shorter in the post-training group than in the pretraining group (p = .009). In particular, the decision-to-entering the operating room interval was significantly shorter in the post-training group than in the pretraining group (p = .003). The umbilical artery pH was significantly better in post-training group than in the pretraining group (p = .019). Furthermore, the umbilical artery pH was significantly improved by simulation training only in "irreversible" cases (p = .012).

CONCLUSIONS

The DDI was significantly shortened by introducing simulation training. We also demonstrated a beneficial effect of the simulation training on the umbilical artery pH, especially in "irreversible" cases, without increasing the rate of maternal adverse outcome.

Evaluation of timings and outcomes in category-one caesarean sections: A retrospective cohort study

Background and Aims:

A decision-to-delivery interval (DDI) of 30 min for category-one caesarean section (CS) deliveries is the standard of practice recommended by clinical guidelines. Our institution established a protocol for category-one (‘crash’) CS to expedite deliveries. The aim of this study is to evaluate DDI, factors that affect DDI and the mode of anaesthesia for category-one CS.

Methods:

This retrospective cohort study evaluated 390 women who underwent category-one CS in a tertiary obstetric centre. We analysed the factors associated with DDI, mode of anaesthesia and perinatal outcomes. Summary statistics were performed for the outcomes. The association factors were considered significant at P < 0.05.

Results:

The mean (standard deviation) DDI was 9.4 (3.2) min with all deliveries achieved within 30 min. The longest factor in the DDI was time taken to transfer patients. A shorter DDI was not significantly associated with improved perinatal outcomes. The majority (88.9%) of women had general anaesthesia (GA) for category-one CS. Of those who had an epidural catheter already in situ (34.4%), 25.6% had successful epidural extension. GA was associated with shorter DDI, but worse perinatal outcomes than regional anaesthesia (RA).

Conclusions:

Our ‘crash’ CS protocol achieved 100% of deliveries within 30 min. The majority (88.9%) of the patients had GA for category-one CS. GA was found to be associated with shorter anaesthesia and operation times, but poorer perinatal outcomes compared to RA.