17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Misoprostol as an adjunct to oxytocin can reduce postpartum-haemorrhage: a propensity score–matched retrospective chart review in Bamenda-Cameroon, 2015–2016

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          There is some evidence that suggests misoprostol may supplement the action of oxytocin in preventing post-partum haemorrhage (PPH). The primary objective of this study was to determine the effect of the administration of 600 μg misoprostol in addition to oxytocin versus oxytocin alone, on the risk of PPH among pregnant women after delivery. The secondary objectives were to determine the effects of the above combination on maternal death and blood transfusion among pregnant women after delivery; and to determine the incidence of PPH, its case fatality, and the maternal mortality ratio in our hospital.

          Methods

          Design and setting: Retrospective chart review of 1736 women delivering at the Regional Hospital Bamenda Cameroon, between 2015 and 2016. This was a pre versus post study following a policy change in the prevention of PPH.

          Exposure groups: One group received oxytocin-misoprostol (January–April 2016: period after policy change), and the second group received oxytocin-only (January–April 2015: period before policy change) after delivery.

          Outcomes: The primary outcome was PPH, and the secondary outcomes were maternal death and blood transfusion.

          Statistical analysis: A 1:1 matching with replacement was done with the propensity score (PS). The groups were compared using PS matching with conditional logistic regression on the matched pairs as the main analysis. A sensitivity analysis was done using other PS adjustment methods and multiple regression.

          Results

          Of the 1736 women included in this study, 1238 were matched and compared. Women who received oxytocin-misoprostol were less likely to have PPH as compared to those receiving oxytocin-only (odds ratio [OR] 0.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.08, 0.59, p = 0.003). This reduced odds of PPH was upheld in the different sensitivity analyses. There were no significant differences in the odds of maternal death and the use of blood transfusions between the two groups: OR 3.91, 95% CI [0.44, 35.08], p = 0.22, and OR 0.89, 95% CI [0.14–5.63], p = 0.91, respectively. Sensitivity analyses showed similar results. The incidence of PPH was 2.9% (before adding misoprostol the incidence was 4.4% and after adding misoprostol it was 1.5%), the case fatality rate of PPH was 1.96%, and the overall maternal mortality ratio in the hospital was 293 maternal deaths/100000 life births.

          Conclusion

          Our evidence suggests that using 600 μg misoprostol as an add-on to oxytocin in the prevention of post-partum haemorrhage significantly reduces the odds of PPH without affecting other maternal outcomes.

          Related collections

          Most cited references22

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Propensity Score: an Alternative Method of Analyzing Treatment Effects

          In intervention trials, only randomization guarantees equal distributions of all known and unknown patient characteristics between an intervention group and a control group and enables causal statements on treatment effects. However, randomized controlled trials have been criticized for insufficient external validity; non-randomized trials are an alternative here, but come with the danger of intervention and control groups differing with respect to known and/or unknown patient characteristics. Non-randomized trials are generally analyzed with multiple regression models, but the so-called propensity score method is now being increasingly used.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Are propensity scores really superior to standard multivariable analysis?

            Clinicians often face difficult decisions despite the lack of evidence from randomized trials. Thus, clinical evidence is often shaped by non-randomized studies exploiting multivariable approaches to limit the extent of confounding. Since their introduction, propensity scores have been used more and more frequently to estimate relevant clinical effects adjusting for established confounders, especially in small datasets. However, debate persists on their real usefulness in comparison to standard multivariable approaches such as logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard analysis. This holds even truer in light of key quantitative developments such as bootstrap and Bayesian methods. This qualitative review aims to provide a concise and practical guide to choose between propensity scores and standard multivariable analysis, emphasizing strengths and weaknesses of both approaches. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Do observational studies using propensity score methods agree with randomized trials? A systematic comparison of studies on acute coronary syndromes.

              Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for assessing the efficacy of therapeutic interventions because randomization protects from biases inherent in observational studies. Propensity score (PS) methods, proposed as a potential solution to confounding of the treatment-outcome association, are widely used in observational studies of therapeutic interventions for acute coronary syndromes (ACS). We aimed to systematically assess agreement between observational studies using PS methods and RCTs on therapeutic interventions for ACS. We searched for observational studies of interventions for ACS that used PS methods to estimate treatment effects on short- or long-term mortality. Using a standardized algorithm, we matched observational studies to RCTs based on patients' characteristics, interventions, and outcomes ('topics'), and we compared estimates of treatment effect between the two designs. When multiple observational studies or RCTs were identified for the same topic, we performed a meta-analysis and used the summary relative risk for comparisons. We matched 21 observational studies investigating 17 distinct clinical topics to 63 RCTs (median = 3 RCTs per observational study) for short-term (7 topics) and long-term (10 topics) mortality. Estimates from PS analyses differed statistically significantly from randomized evidence in two instances; however, observational studies reported more extreme beneficial treatment effects compared with RCTs in 13 of 17 instances (P = 0.049). Sensitivity analyses limited to large RCTs, and using alternative meta-analysis models yielded similar results. For the treatment of ACS, observational studies using PS methods produce treatment effect estimates that are of more extreme magnitude compared with those from RCTs, although the differences are rarely statistically significant.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                ikomi_fred@yahoo.com , morfawf@mcmaster.ca
                drmercy34@gmail.com
                ikomifred@gmail.com
                lindaachiri84@gmail.com
                mbuagblc@mcmaster.ca
                ln.anderson@mcmaster.ca
                thabanl@mcmaster.ca
                Journal
                BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
                BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
                BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2393
                22 July 2019
                22 July 2019
                2019
                : 19
                : 257
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8227, GRID grid.25073.33, Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, , McMaster University, ; Hamilton, ON Canada
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2173 8504, GRID grid.412661.6, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, , Faculty of Medicines and Biomedical Sciences University of Yaounde 1, ; Yaoundé, Cameroon
                [3 ]GRID grid.449799.e, Department of Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, , University of Bamenda, ; Bamenda, Cameroon
                [4 ]Regional Hospital Bamenda, Bamenda, Cameroon
                [5 ]Biostatistics Unit, St Joseph Healthcare—Hamilton, Hamilton, ON Canada
                [6 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0647 4688, GRID grid.460723.4, Centre for Development of Best Practices in Health, , Yaoundé Central Hospital, ; Yaoundé, Cameroon
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7520-082X
                Article
                2407
                10.1186/s12884-019-2407-3
                6647290
                31331275
                c2b714c2-0df4-4e00-80a0-09b9afe61f3f
                © The Author(s). 2019

                Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 27 December 2018
                : 11 July 2019
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Obstetrics & Gynecology
                post-partum haemorrhage,misoprostol,oxytocin,maternal mortality
                Obstetrics & Gynecology
                post-partum haemorrhage, misoprostol, oxytocin, maternal mortality

                Comments

                Comment on this article