No abstract

Background Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) is the leading cause of maternal mortality worldwide. Prophylactic uterotonic agents can prevent PPH, and are routinely recommended. The current World Health Organization (WHO) recommendation for preventing PPH is 10 IU (international units) of intramuscular or intravenous oxytocin. There are several uterotonic agents for preventing PPH but there is still uncertainty about which agent is most effective with the least side effects. This is an update of a Cochrane Review which was first published in April 2018 and was updated to incorporate results from a recent large WHO trial. Objectives To identify the most effective uterotonic agent(s) to prevent PPH with the least side effects, and generate a ranking according to their effectiveness and side‐effect profile. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth’s Trials Register, , the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform ( ) (24 May 2018), and reference lists of retrieved studies. Selection criteria All randomised controlled trials or cluster‐randomised trials comparing the effectiveness and side effects of uterotonic agents with other uterotonic agents, placebo or no treatment for preventing PPH were eligible for inclusion. Quasi‐randomised trials were excluded. Randomised trials published only as abstracts were eligible if sufficient information could be retrieved. Data collection and analysis At least three review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We estimated the relative effects and rankings for preventing PPH ≥ 500 mL and PPH ≥ 1000 mL as primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included blood loss and related outcomes, morbidity outcomes, maternal well‐being and satisfaction and side effects. Primary outcomes were also reported for pre‐specified subgroups, stratifying by mode of birth, prior risk of PPH, healthcare setting, dosage, regimen and route of administration. We performed pairwise meta‐analyses and network meta‐analysis to determine the relative effects and rankings of all available agents. Main results The network meta‐analysis included 196 trials (135,559 women) involving seven uterotonic agents and placebo or no treatment, conducted across 53 countries (including high‐, middle‐ and low‐income countries). Most trials were performed in a hospital setting (187/196, 95.4%) with women undergoing a vaginal birth (71.5%, 140/196). Relative effects from the network meta‐analysis suggested that all agents were effective for preventing PPH ≥ 500 mL when compared with placebo or no treatment. The three highest ranked uterotonic agents for prevention of PPH ≥ 500 mL were ergometrine plus oxytocin combination, misoprostol plus oxytocin combination and carbetocin. There ...

BackgroundDespite decades of research, the concept of normality in labour in terms of its progression and duration is not universal or standardized. However, in clinical practice, it is important to define the boundaries that distinguish what is normal from what is abnormal to enable women and care providers have a shared understanding of what to expect and when labour interventions are justified.ObjectivesTo synthesise available evidence on the duration of latent and active first stage and the second stage of spontaneous labour in women at low risk of complications with ‘normal’ perinatal outcomes.Search strategyPubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, POPLINE, Global Health Library, and reference lists of eligible studies.Selection criteriaObservational studies and other study designs.Data collection and analysisFour authors extracted data on: maternal characteristics; labour interventions; duration of latent first stage, active first stage, and second stage of labour; and the definitions of onset of latent and active first stage, and second stage where reported. Heterogeneity in the included studies precluded meta-analysis and data were presented descriptively.Main resultsThirty-seven studies reporting the duration of first and/or second stages of labour for 208,000 women met our inclusion criteria. Among nulliparous women, the median duration of active first stage (when the starting reference point was 4 cm) ranged from 3.7–5.9 h (95th percentiles: 14.5–16.7 h). With active phase starting from 5 cm, the median duration was from 3.8–4.3 h (95th percentiles: 11.3–12.7 h). The median duration of second stage ranged from 14 to 66 min (95th percentiles: 65–138 min) and from 6 to 12 min (95th percentiles: 58–76 min) in nulliparous and parous women, respectively. Sensitivity analyses excluding first and second stage interventions did not significantly impact on these findingsConclusionsThe duration of spontaneous labour in women with good perinatal outcomes varies from one woman to another. Some women may experience labour for longer than previously thought, and still achieve a vaginal birth without adverse perinatal outcomes. Our findings question the rigid limits currently applied in clinical practice for the assessment of prolonged first or second stage that warrant obstetric intervention.

Background Maternal infections are an important cause of maternal mortality and severe maternal morbidity. We report the main findings of the WHO Global Maternal Sepsis Study, which aimed to assess the frequency of maternal infections in health facilities, according to maternal characteristics and outcomes, and coverage of core practices for early identification and management.Methods We did a facility-based, prospective, 1-week inception cohort study in 713 health facilities providing obstetric, midwifery, or abortion care, or where women could be admitted because of complications of pregnancy, childbirth, post-partum, or post-abortion, in 52 low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) and high-income countries (HICs). We obtained data from hospital records for all pregnant or recently pregnant women hospitalised with suspected or confirmed infection. We calculated ratios of infection and infection-related severe maternal outcomes (ie, death or near-miss) per 1000 livebirths and the proportion of intrahospital fatalities across country income groups, as well as the distribution of demographic, obstetric, clinical characteristics and outcomes, and coverage of a set of core practices for identification and management across infection severity groups.

Overall, the evidence in this review is insufficient to support the use of one method over another for blood loss estimation after vaginal birth. In general, the quality of evidence for our predefined outcomes ranged from low to high quality, with downgrading decisions due to imprecision. The included trials did not report on many of our primary and secondary outcomes.In trials that evaluate methods for estimating blood loss during vaginal birth, we believe it is important to measure their impact on clinical maternal and neonatal outcomes, along with their diagnostic accuracy. This body of knowledge needs further, well designed, appropriately powered, randomised controlled trials that correlate blood loss with relevant clinical outcomes, such as those listed in this review.