Correlation Study Between Delivery Time of Low Risk Pregnant Women and Maternal and Perinatal Outcomes

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2013.02.019

Objective

To investigate the influence of the delivery time of low risk pregnant women on maternal and perinatal outcomes.

Methods

From January 2007 to December 2011, 11 180 pregnant women with low labor risk were included in the study, and divided into the true labor group(n=6288) and the false labor group(n=4892) according to their signs and symptoms. Delivery time, mode of delivery, induction of parturition, progress of labor, postpartum hemorrhage and Apgar score of newborns were compared. There was no significant difference in gereral condition between two groups (P>0.05). The study protocol was approved by the Ethical Review Board of Investigation in Human Being of Southwest Hospital.Informed consent was obtained from each patient.

Results

There had significant differences between two groups in delivery time, incidence rate of cesarean section and vaginal delivery(P<0.05). There also had significant difference in rate of induction of parturition between two groups(P<0.05). Compared to the true labor group, active period and second stage of labor were significantly longer in the false labor group(P<0.05), volume of postpartum hemorrhage in 2 hours was significantly larger in the false labor group as well(P<0.05). The rate of Apgar score (≤7) of newborns in the true labor group was obviously higher than that of the false labor group(P<0.05).

Conclusions

To shorten the delivery time of low risk pregnant women is helpful to reduce the incidence rate of cesarean section and improve the maternal and perinatal outcomes.

Key words: delivery time, delivery mode, perinatal outcome

表1 两组产妇一般情况比较(±s)

Table 1 Comparison of general condition between two groups (±s)

组别	n	年龄(岁)	身高(cm)	体重(kg)	孕龄(孕周)
临产组	6288	27.4±3.3	162.8±5.1	71.8±7.9	38.9±1.8
待产组	4892	26.8±3.9	163.2±6.3	72.2±6.3	39.6±1.5
t		2.202	1.315	1.732	2.080
P		0.701	0.445	0.310	0.527

表1 两组产妇一般情况比较(±s)

Table 1 Comparison of general condition between two groups (±s)

组别	n	年龄(岁)	身高(cm)	体重(kg)	孕龄(孕周)
临产组	6288	27.4±3.3	162.8±5.1	71.8±7.9	38.9±1.8
待产组	4892	26.8±3.9	163.2±6.3	72.2±6.3	39.6±1.5
t		2.202	1.315	1.732	2.080
P		0.701	0.445	0.310	0.527

表2 两组产妇住院待产时间和分娩方式比较(±s)

Table 2 Comparison of delivery time and mode of delivery between two groups (±s)

组别	n	住院待产时间(h)	剖宫产[n(%)]	阴道分娩[n(%)]
临产组	6288	20.17±11.62	2207(35.1)	4081(64.9)
待产组	4892	42.08±29.34	2656(54.3)	2236(45.7)
t/χ²		10.722	4.054	7.473
P		0.021	0.019	0.017

表2 两组产妇住院待产时间和分娩方式比较(±s)

Table 2 Comparison of delivery time and mode of delivery between two groups (±s)

组别	n	住院待产时间(h)	剖宫产[n(%)]	阴道分娩[n(%)]
临产组	6288	20.17±11.62	2207(35.1)	4081(64.9)
待产组	4892	42.08±29.34	2656(54.3)	2236(45.7)
t/χ²		10.722	4.054	7.473
P		0.021	0.019	0.017

表3 两组产妇诱导分娩情况比较[n(%)]

Table 3 Comparison of induction of parturition between two groups[n(%)]

组别	n	诱导分娩方式
组别	n	0.5%催产素	25 μg米索前列腺	10 mg控释前列腺E₂	人工破膜
临产组	6288	94 (1.5)	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)	619 (9.8)
待产组	4892	733(15.0)	3424(70.0)	489(10.0)	1076(22.0)
χ²		13.532	58.490	20.620	4.732
P		0.000	0.000	0.000	0.031

表3 两组产妇诱导分娩情况比较[n(%)]

Table 3 Comparison of induction of parturition between two groups[n(%)]

组别	n	诱导分娩方式
组别	n	0.5%催产素	25 μg米索前列腺	10 mg控释前列腺E₂	人工破膜
临产组	6288	94 (1.5)	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)	619 (9.8)
待产组	4892	733(15.0)	3424(70.0)	489(10.0)	1076(22.0)
χ²		13.532	58.490	20.620	4.732
P		0.000	0.000	0.000	0.031

表4 两组产妇产程进展情况比较(min，±s)

Table 4 Comparison of progress of labor between two groups (min，±s)

组别	n	活跃期	第一产程	第二产程	第三产程	总产程
临产组	6288	124.7±61.6	391.7±135.8	59.4±14.1	8.4±3.7	480.8±144.9
待产组	4892	178.3±63.7	400.2±129.4	80.2±21.5	8.8±3.5	500.7±149.4
t		4.881	1.630	2.146	1.980	1.062
P		0.009	0.145	0.006	0.211	0.310

表4 两组产妇产程进展情况比较(min，±s)

Table 4 Comparison of progress of labor between two groups (min，±s)

组别	n	活跃期	第一产程	第二产程	第三产程	总产程
临产组	6288	124.7±61.6	391.7±135.8	59.4±14.1	8.4±3.7	480.8±144.9
待产组	4892	178.3±63.7	400.2±129.4	80.2±21.5	8.8±3.5	500.7±149.4
t		4.881	1.630	2.146	1.980	1.062
P		0.009	0.145	0.006	0.211	0.310

表5 两组产妇产后出血量比较(mL，±s)

Table 5 Comparison of postpartum hemorrhage between two groups (mL，±s)

组别	n	产后出血量
组别	n	分娩时	产后1 h	产后2 h
临产组	6288	160.15±36.46	71.29±30.33	41.34±19.26
待产组	4892	181.68±48.74	86.46±32.71	47.35±23.24
t		4.044	1.574	0.781
P		0.003	0.182	0.424

表5 两组产妇产后出血量比较(mL，±s)

Table 5 Comparison of postpartum hemorrhage between two groups (mL，±s)

组别	n	产后出血量
组别	n	分娩时	产后1 h	产后2 h
临产组	6288	160.15±36.46	71.29±30.33	41.34±19.26
待产组	4892	181.68±48.74	86.46±32.71	47.35±23.24
t		4.044	1.574	0.781
P		0.003	0.182	0.424

表6 两组新生儿Apgar评分比较[n(%)，分]

Table 6 Comparison of Apgar score of newborns between two groups[n(%)，分]

组别	n	生后1 min			生后5 min
组别	n	<4	4～7	8～10	<4	4～7	8～10
临产组	6288	220(3.5)	50(0.8)	6018(95.7)	0(0.0)	126(0.2)	6162(98.8)
待产组	4892	347(7.1)	435(8.9)	4109(84.0)	49(0.1)	186(3.8)	4657(96.1)
χ²		5.330	8.987	0.510	0.981	3.940	0.000
P		0.021	0.003	0.478	0.322	0.046	0.778

表6 两组新生儿Apgar评分比较[n(%)，分]

Table 6 Comparison of Apgar score of newborns between two groups[n(%)，分]

组别	n	生后1 min			生后5 min
组别	n	<4	4～7	8～10	<4	4～7	8～10
临产组	6288	220(3.5)	50(0.8)	6018(95.7)	0(0.0)	126(0.2)	6162(98.8)
待产组	4892	347(7.1)	435(8.9)	4109(84.0)	49(0.1)	186(3.8)	4657(96.1)
χ²		5.330	8.987	0.510	0.981	3.940	0.000
P		0.021	0.003	0.478	0.322	0.046	0.778

[1]	Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M, Gülmezoglu AM, et al. Method of delivery and pregnancy outcomes in Asia: The WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health 2007-2008[J]. Lancet, 2010, 375(9713):490-499.
[2]	Wang BS, Zhou LF, Coulter D, et al. Effects of caesarean section on maternal health in low risk nulliparous women: A prospective matched cohort study in Shanghai, China[J]. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 2010, 2(10):78.
[3]	Li M, Zhang YM, Liu H, et al. Impact of early admission in labor on the rate of cesarean delivery[J]. Chin J Fam Plann, 2011, 19(1):34-36.
[4]	Wang ML. Effect of delivery time on delivery mode[J]. Matern Child Health Care China, 2005, 20(24):3271-3272.
[5]	Guo LY, Bai BQ, Long J, et al. Relationship between psychological state and the mode of delivery in pregnant women[J].Chin J Pract Gynecol Obstet, 2001, 17(5):281-282.
[6]	Li HY, Jiang L. Effect of early admission in labor on the rate of cesarean delivery[J]. Clin J Med Off, 2012, 40(2):407-408.
[7]	Li CF. Effect of delivery time on delivery mode[J]. Matern Child Health Care China, 2009, 24(1):38-39.
[8]	Wang DZ, Luo HF, Zhang D. Experience collection of chinese obstetrics and gynecology experts[M]. Shengyang: Liaoning Science and Technology Press, 2001, 1106.
[9]	Yue J.Obstetrics and Gynecology.7th ed[M].Beijing: People's Medical Publishing House, 2008, 65.

[1]	Xia Zhu, Yanduo Gao, Cai Xu, Wan Tang, Lei Xie, Qian Ge, Fenfang Chen, Sheng Zhao. Effect of parity and delivery mode on levator hiatus area evaluated by pelvic floor three-dimensional ultrasound[J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2022, 19(09): 920-925.
[2]	Sha He, Sheng Zhao, Jianhua Fan, Yanduo Gao, Junhong Huang, Xiuqin Ji, Xia Zhu. Assessment of impact of parity and different delivery modes on thickness of the puborectalis in postpartum women by pelvic ultrasound[J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2022, 19(01): 17-22.
[3]	Jufen Gan, Yi Zhou, Wenqian Qiu, Liang Li, Chuanfen Gao, Wanyan Li, Chaoxue Zhang. Value of ultrasound in diagnosing umbilical cord knot and its effect on fetal perinatal outcome[J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2021, 18(07): 676-680.
[4]	Yun Bai, Lian Xu, Feifei Liu, Tao Ying. Tomographic ultrasound evaluation of avulsion of the levator ani in postpartum women according to delivery mode[J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2016, 13(03): 209-212.
[5]	Lu Zhang, Huijuan Yang, Kaibo Liu. Risk factors of perinatal outcomes of surviving baby after vanishing twin syndrome[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2022, 18(04): 400-409.
[6]	Xilong Liu, Qian Rong, Yue Xing, Biqiong Pan, Dan Lu. Correlation study between serum N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide levels and pregnancy outcomes of pregnant women with severe preeclampsia[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2021, 17(06): 709-714.
[7]	Tingting Xu, Xiaodong Wang, Haiyan Yu. Perinatal outcomes and managements for monochorionic diamniotic triplet pregnancies[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2018, 14(02): 141-146.
[8]	Haiyan Yu, Chunyan Deng, Xinghui Liu, Xiaodong Wang. Perinatal outcomes analysis of monochorionic monoamniotic twin pregnancy[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2017, 13(06): 645-651.
[9]	Hongyu Li, Dan Wang, Qing Chang, Dan Zou. Effects of different modes of delivery on maternal and perinatal outcomes in low-risk puerperant[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2016, 12(06): 715-719.
[10]	Hai-yan ZHANG, Tian-cheng WANG. Study of Key Success Factors About Vaginal Delivery With Repeated Pregnancy After Cesarean Section[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2012, 08(06): 733-734.
[11]	Xun-feng ZHENG, Ju-lang DONG, Ji-hong DU, Yan-hong CHEN. Clinical Analysis of Treatment for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus and Pregnancy Outcomes[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2012, 08(04): 447-449.
[12]	Xiaoqiao Guo, Wenqiong Lu. Optimal timing of pregnancy termination in super-advanced age pregnant women[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinicians(Electronic Edition), 2019, 13(11): 846-849.
[13]	Siqi Li, Xin Yang, Wenlei Wang. Clinical value of transperineal ultrasound in evaluating the structural and functional changes of female postpartum pelvic floor[J]. Chinese Journal of Interventional Radiology(Electronic Edition), 2021, 09(02): 183-187.
[14]	Peifen Dai, Yiying Wang. Delivery mode and pregnancy outcome in pregnant women with heart failure[J]. Chinese Journal of Heart and Heart Rhythm(Electronic Edition), 2018, 06(03): 146-148.
[15]	Yufang Wan. The delivery mode of pregnancy complicated with heart disease and its effect on the prognosis of neonates[J]. Chinese Journal of Heart and Heart Rhythm(Electronic Edition), 2018, 06(01): 25-27.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export