Demographic profile in women undergoing second stage caesarean section
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20200338Keywords:
Demographic factors, Raised body mass index, Second stage caesareanAbstract
Background: Incidence of caesarean section is rapidly rising over the last two decades and 25% is contributed by second stage caesarean section. Demographic factors influencing fetomaternal outcome in second stage caesarean section include BMI, socioeconomic status, booking/ unbooking status, gravidity and maternal height.
Methods: The present study was prospective observational study conducted in the department of obstetrics and gynaecology at Lady Hardanger Medical College New Delhi from December 2015 to March 2017. 80 women were enrolled in the study. A detailed history and examination of each patient was carried out. Women were observed during lab our till second stage caesarean section.
Results: Mean age of population was 25.26±3.75 ranging from 19-40 year. 76.25% included in study were booked and 11.25% were unbooked, 42.5% belonged to lower middle class and 31.25% belonged to upper middle class. 47% women had height of <150 cm and 70% had a BMI between (25-29.9) kg/m. 43% women had gestational age between 39-40 weeks.
Conclusions: Second stage caesarean section was more common in young age group and primigravidae. Higher BMI was not only operative but obstetrical risk as well.
References
Martin A, Hamilton BE, Ventura SJ, Osterman MJ, Kirmeyer S, Maathews TJ, et al. Birth: final data for 2009. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2011;60:1-70.
Zizza A, Tinelli I, Malvasi A, Barbone E, Stark M, Guido M, et al. Caesarean sections in the World: a new ecological approach. J Prevent Med Hyg. 2011;52:4.
Allen VM, O’Connell CM, Basket TF. Maternal morbidity associated with caesarean delivery without labour compared with spontaneous onset of labour at term. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2003;102:477-82.
Seal SL, Kamilya G, Mukherji J, Bhattacharya SK, Harza A. Outcome in second- versus first stage caesarean delivery in a teaching institution in Eastern India. Am J Perinatol. 2010;27:507-12.
Unterscheider J, Menamin M, Cullinane F. Rising rates of cesarean deliveries at full cervical dilatation: a concerning trend. Eu J Obstet Gynecol Repro Biol. 2011;157:141-4.
Moodley J, Devjee J, Khedun SM, Esterhuizen T. Second-stage primary caesarean deliveries: are maternal complications increased. SA Fam Pract. 2009;51(4):328-31.
Asicioglu O, Gungorduk K, Yildrim G, Cemal A. Second stage versus first stage caesarean delivery comparison of maternal and perinatal outcomes. J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;1:7.
Alexander, James M, Kenneth J, Leveno, Rouse, Dwight J, et al. Comparison of maternal and infant outcomes from primary caesarean delivery during the second compared with first stage of labour. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109:917-21.
Malathi J, Venigalla S. Comparison of obstetric outcome between first and second stage caesarean sections in rural tertiary hospital. Int J Pharma Biomed Res. 2012;3(4):222-5.
Jain N, Lal P. A retrospective comparative study of feto-maternal outcome in first and second stage caesarean section. Int J Reprod Contracep Obstet Gynecol. 2016;5(7):2282.
Sucak A, Celen S, Akbaba E, Soysal S, Moraloglu O, Danisman N. Comparison of nulliparous undergoing caesarean section in first and second stages of labour. Obstet Gynaecol Int. 201;4.
Prameela. Comparison of obstetric and neonatal outcome between first and second stage caesarean sections in Tertiary Hospital MMC and RI, Mysore. Int J Recent Trends Sci Technol. 2015;14(3):520-2.
Das S, Sarkar SK. Fetomaternal outcome in second versus first stage caesarean delivery in a tertiary rural medical collage. IOSR J Dent Med Sci. 2014;13(12):28-30.
Baird D. Dystocia due to faults in the pelvis. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1985;92:1235-45.
Mckelvey A, Ashe R, Mckenna D, Roberts. Caesarean section in second stage of labour: retrospective view of obstetric setting and morbidity. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2010;30(3):264-7.
