No abstract

ObjectiveTo assess the effectiveness of introducing condom‐catheter uterine balloon tamponade (UBT) for postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) management in low‐ and middle‐income settings.DesignStepped wedge, cluster‐randomised trial.SettingEighteen secondary‐level hospitals in Uganda, Egypt and Senegal.PopulationWomen with vaginal delivery from October 2016 to March 2018.MethodsUse of condom‐catheter UBT for PPH management was introduced using a half‐day training and provision of pre‐packaged UBT kits. Hospitals were randomised to when UBT was introduced. The incident rate (IR) of study outcomes was compared in the control (i.e. before UBT) and intervention (i.e. after UBT) periods. Mixed effects regression models accounted for clustering (random effect) and time period (fixed effect).Main outcome measuresCombined IR of PPH‐related invasive surgery and/or maternal death.ResultsThere were 28 183 and 31 928 deliveries in the control and intervention periods, respectively. UBT was used for 9/1357 and 55/1037 women diagnosed with PPH in control and intervention periods, respectively. PPH‐related surgery or maternal death occurred in 19 women in the control period (IR = 6.7/10 000 deliveries) and 37 in the intervention period (IR = 11.6/10 000 deliveries). The adjusted IR ratio was 4.08 (95% confidence interval 1.07–15.58). Secondary outcomes, including rates of transfer and blood transfusion, were similar in the trial periods.ConclusionsIntroduction of condom‐catheter UBT in these settings did not improve maternal outcomes and was associated with an increase in the combined incidence of PPH‐related surgery and maternal death. The lack of demonstrated benefit of UBT introduction with respect to severe outcomes warrants reflection on its role.Tweetable abstractStepped wedge trial shows UBT introduction does not reduce the combined incidence of PPH‐related surgery or death.

BackgroundIn low-resource settings, where abortion is highly restricted and self-induced abortions are common, access to post-abortion care (PAC) services, especially treatment of incomplete terminations, is a priority. Standard post-abortion care has involved surgical intervention but can be hard to access in these areas. Misoprostol provides an alternative to surgical intervention that could increase access to abortion care. We sought to gather additional evidence regarding the efficacy of 400 mcg of sublingual misoprostol vs. standard surgical care for treatment of incomplete abortion in the environments where need for economical non-surgical treatments may be most useful.MethodsA total of 860 women received either sublingual misoprostol or standard surgical care for treatment of incomplete abortion in a multi-site randomized trial. Women with confirmed incomplete abortion, defined as past or present history of vaginal bleeding during pregnancy and an open cervical os, were eligible to participate. Participants returned for follow-up one week later to confirm clinical status. If abortion was incomplete at that time, women were offered an additional follow-up visit or immediate surgical evacuation.ResultsBoth misoprostol and surgical evacuation are highly effective treatments for incomplete abortion (misoprostol: 94.4%, surgical: 100.0%). Misoprostol treatment resulted in a somewhat lower chance of success than standard surgical practice (RR = 0.90; 95% CI: 0.89-0.92). Both tolerability of side effects and women’s satisfaction were similar in the two study arms.ConclusionMisoprostol, much easier to provide than surgery in low-resource environments, can be used safely, successfully, and satisfactorily for treatment of incomplete abortion. Focus should shift to program implementation, including task-shifting the provision of post-abortion care to mid- and low- level providers, training and assurance of drug availability.Trial registrationThis study has been registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00466999 and NCT01539408

No abstract

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.