ABSTRACT
Background: The ability to determine accurately, the blood loss during childbirth is of extreme importance in the diagnosis and management of primary postpartum haemorrhage (PPH). Aims: In this study, we evaluate the effectiveness of visual estimation of blood loss, as a method of diagnosing primary postpartum haemorrhage. Methodology: A cross-sectional study on 271 participants was conducted between April and October 2012, at the Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital. Women who went through spontaneous vaginal delivery were monitored and blood loss after delivery was visually estimated and then measured with a graduated receptacle, up to 1 hour post-delivery. The paired t-test and Bland- Altman plot was used to compare outcomes of the two methods. P<0.05 was considered significant. Results: Mean age of study participants was 27.7±5.7. As per visual estimation, most participants were reported to have lost <200 ml of blood (45.0%) as opposed to that of measured losses where most participants had lost between 200-500 ml of blood (48.7%). The mean measured blood loss was 306.09±218.39 ml against a 250±188.78 ml mean visually estimated blood loss (P < 0.0001). Prevalence of primary PPH as estimated with measured blood losses was 20.3% (55/271). Visual estimation, however gave a prevalence of 15.9% (43/271), an underestimation by 4.4%. A Bland- Altman plot showed a clinical bias large enough to cause significant differences in diagnosis of primary PPH. Conclusion: This study adds to existing evidence that the visual estimation of blood loss in clinical settings underestimates losses and is not reliable. This can lead to misdiagnosis of primary PPH and thus an underestimation of the condition. Health care workers should therefore base diagnosis on calibrated measurement methods.
ABSTRACT
Aim: In 2005, the Ghana Health Service mandated malaria and helminths chemoprophylaxis during antenatal care visits. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of malaria and helminth infections and their relationship with adverse birth outcomes (low birth weight, stillbirth, and preterm) following the implementation of these treatments. Study Design: A quantitative cross-sectional study. Method: The study was conducted on 630 women presenting for delivery in the Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital and the Manhyia District Hospital from July to November 2011. Socio-demographic information and medical and obstetric history were collected. Laboratory analyses for the presence of malaria and helminths were performed. Association of malaria and helminths with birth outcomes was assessed using logistic regression to obtain odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals. Results: The prevalence of malaria, helminths and adverse birth outcomes was 9.0%, 5.0% and 22.2%, respectively. Compared with women who received malaria prophylaxis, women without malaria prophylaxis were two times more likely to have malaria infection (aOR = 2.1; 95% CI = 1.06-4.17). Women who were not screened for helminths were twice as likely to be infected with helminths (aOR = 2.4; 95% CI = 1.15-5.12) than women who were screened for helminths. For women infected with hookworm or Schistosoma mansoni, the odds of having an adverse birth outcome (aOR = 3.9; 95% CI = 1.09-14.20) and stillbirth (aOR = 7.7; 95% CI = 1.21-36.38) were greater than for women who were not infected. Conclusion: The prevalence of malaria, helminths and adverse birth outcomes was lower than previously reported 9.0% vs. 36.3, 5.0% vs. 25.7 and 22.2% vs. 44.6, respectively. Helminth but not malaria infection was found to be significantly associated with adverse birth outcomes.