DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20160849

Audit of caesarean section for non-progress of labor

Tripti Singh Kathuria, Rekha Sapkal

Abstract


Background: There is alarming increase in the number of caesarean section in the recent past years and many of the indications are due to non-progress of labor. The aim of the present study is to evaluate various parameters and associated factors responsible for non-progress of labor and to study the neonatal outcome.

Methods: Retrospective analysis of 42 emergency cases leading into caesarean section for non-progress of labor was done. Factors like age, parity, gestational age, duration of prolong labor, maternal and neonatal outcome was analyzed.

Results: In our study mean age of the women who underwent caesarean section for non-progress of labor was 25 years±2.26. When the duration of labor was analyzed, maximum cases i.e. 60% non-progress of labor is seen in active phase, 30% cases had prolonged latent phase of labor, arrest of descent in 10% .There were 14 babies who were shifted to NICU, out of them 10 babies had Apgar score <7. Average baby weight was 2689grams±446.60. Median range of birth weight was 2800 grams.

Conclusions: Maximum cases 60% were in active phase, 10% with non-progress in second stage of labor. Out of total cases, 33% of newborns had NICU admission, out of them 16% had poor Apgar score but rate of NICU admission due to non-progress of labor remained same. Hence early decision making in caesarean section will help in preventing neonatal complication. There was no neonatal mortality observed in the study.

Keywords


Non progress of labor, Caesarean section, Neonatal outcome

Full Text:

PDF

References


William PD, Choate JW, Nusbaum M, Mccarthy MA, Margaret R, Mortimer G et al. Obstetric care and cesarean birth rates: a program to monitor quality of care. Audit of caesarean section for non-progress of labor. 1992;80:5.

Dutta DC, Konar H. Textbook of obstetrics, perinatology and contraception. 2004;6:402.

Allen VM, Baskett TF, O'Connell CM, McKeen D, Allen AC. Maternal and perinatal outcomes with increasing duration of the second stage of labor. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113(6):1248-58.

Gifford D, Spelliscy M, Fiske SC, Keesey M, Keeler J, Kahn K. Lack of progress in labor as a reason for cesarean. Obstetr Gynecol. 2000;95(4):589-95.

Thomas MD, Joaquin S. Maternal and neonatal outcomes in patients with a prolonged second stage of labor. department of obstetrics and gynecology, Saint Louis University, St. Mary's Health Center, St. Louis, Missouri; and Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Texas Tech Health Sciences Center, Amarillo, Texas. 2003;102:52-58.

Allen VM, Baskett TF, O'Connell CM, McKeen D, Allen AC. Maternal and perinatal outcomes with increasing duration of the second stage of labor. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. 2009;113(6):1248-58.

Maghoma J, Buchmann EJ. Maternal and fetal risks associated with prolonged latent phase of labor. Department of obs & gynae Chris Hani Baragwanath Maternity Hospital, Soweto, South Africa. 2002;22(1):16.