1. The use of bubble charts in analyzing the global second-stage cesarean delivery rates: a systematic reviewAJOG Global Reports at a Glance
- Author
-
Lin Tai Linus Lee, MRCOG, Christopher Pak Hey Chiu, MRCOG, Man Kee Teresa Ma, MRCOG, Lee Ting Kwong, MRCOG, Man Wai Catherine Hung, MRCOG, Yuen Yee Yannie Chan, MRCOG, Eunice Joanna Wong, MBBS, Theodora Hei Tung Lai, MRCOG, Oi Ka Chan, MSc, Po Lam So, MMedSc, Wai Lam Lau, FRCOG, and Tak Yeung Leung, MD
- Subjects
cesarean delivery ,full dilatation ,second stage ,Gynecology and obstetrics ,RG1-991 - Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically review the worldwide second-stage cesarean delivery rate concerning pre–second-stage cesarean delivery and assisted vaginal birth rates. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Medline Ovid, EBSCOhost, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar were queried from inception to February 2023, with the following terms: “full dilatation,” “second stage,” and “cesarean,” with their word variations. Furthermore, an additional cohort of 353,434 cases from our recently published study was included. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Only original studies that provided sufficient information on the number of pre–second-stage cesarean deliveries, second-stage cesarean deliveries, and vaginal births were included for the calculation of different modes of delivery. Systemic reviews, meta-analyses, or case reports were excluded. METHODS: Study identification and data extraction were independently performed by 2 authors. Selected studies were categorized on the basis of parity, study period, and geographic regions for comparison. RESULTS: A total of 25 studies were included. The overall pre–second-stage cesarean delivery rate, the second-stage cesarean delivery rate, and the second-stage cesarean delivery–to–assisted vaginal birth ratio were 17.94%, 2.65%, and 0.19, respectively. Only 5 studies described singleton, term, cephalic presenting pregnancies of nulliparous women, and their second-stage cesarean delivery rates were significantly higher than those studies with cohorts of all parity groups (4.50% vs 0.83%; P
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF