Research of the assessable method of postpartum hemorrhage

Abstract

Abstract. BACKGROUND: Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) is the most common cause of parturient death worldwide [1]. However, most cases of PPH can be avoided. OBJECTIVE: This paper employs statistical methods to screen risk factors of PPH and calculate relevant parameters. METHODS: Multivariable logistic regression analysis was applied to obtain the regression equation and odds ratio (OR) value. The determined risk factors were assigned comprehensive and reasonable scores according to scientific relevance and reasoning according to the OR value. PPPH values were calculated in order to assess the morbidity of PPH. RESULTS: The scores of pregnant women could be intuitively used to show the risk of getting PPH. CONCLUSIONS: Through the above methods, a comprehensive risk evaluation method of detecting PPH was developed.

Predicting risk of postpartum haemorrhage: a systematic review

“…The search strategy identified 2146 citations; following removal of duplicates and screening, 56 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility (PRISMA Flow Diagram, Figure 1). This review included 14 studies [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27] with a total of 14 final prediction models identified.…”

“…The populations of the included studies are shown in Tables S1 and S2. Five studies 16,18,21,22,27 included only women with placenta praevia, four studies 17,[23][24][25] included only vaginal deliveries, three studies 14,15,20 had a population consisting of CS (planned and unplanned), one study defined population as consisting of women with placenta accreta spectrum 26 and one study 19 had a population encompassing the general obstetric population.…”

“…The setting of the included studies were hospitals in the following countries; Italy, China, France, USA, UK, South Korea, Netherlands, Spain, Zimbabwe, Denmark and Egypt. The study designs included were 11 cohort studies, [14][15][16]18,20,[22][23][24]26,27 of which one used whole population registry data, 21 and three case control studies, 19,25 of which one was nested within a population cohort. 17 The number of participants included in each study ranged from 110 in a prospective cohort study to 56 967 in a retrospective cohort.…”

“…14,27 Despite the attempt to predict PPH across all studies, the chosen outcomes differed. Seven studies [17][18][19][20]22,23,26 listed PPH or massive haemorrhage as an outcome, four studies [14][15][16]21 listed blood transfusion or massive blood transfusion as an outcome, two studies 24,25 reported postpartum blood loss and one study 27 had a combined outcome of peripartum complications encompassing perioperative blood transfusion or uterine artery embolisation or caesarean hysterectomy. There is also variation in the definition and method of measurement of each outcome, as shown in Table S1.…”

“…Overall, there was a high risk of bias across the studies. The participants were deemed as a source of low risk of bias in ten studies, [14][15][16][17]20,[22][23][24]26,27 with three studies at high risk due to large proportion of women excluded due to incomplete data without exploration of how these women compared with those included, 18,19,21 and one at high risk due to retrospective selection of women in a case-control study with a control group at high risk of PPH. 25 Eight studies were at high risk of bias due to predictors being available only after the birth (e.g.…”