Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

P Øian

Publications and source records attributed to P Øian.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

[Modified midwife managed unit--an alternative for small birthing departments?].

BACKGROUND: The Norwegian Board of Health has proposed to divide the delivery units into three categories. For several of today's smaller consultant managed units this could lead to a reclassification into midwife managed units. MATERIAL AND METHODS: During 1997 and 1998 the community hospital in Lofoten has tried out a modified type of midwife managed unit. By a continuous selection process a high risk and a low risk group of gravidas were identified. The high risk group was referred to the central hospital in Bodø, while the low risk group was offered to deliver locally. RESULTS: Previously more than 90% delivered at the community hospital in Lofoten, while approximately 70% still delivered locally during the trial period. There were no deliveries during transport and no serious complications for mother or child caused by the new system. The community hospital had facilities for performing emergency caesarean sections. In 1997 nine caesarean sections out of 211 deliveries and in 1998 four out of 224 were performed. The caesarean section rate for the total population was lower during the trial period than over the previous five years. INTERPRETATION: A modified midwife managed unit could be a good alternative for small consultant managed units if the Norwegian Board of Health's proposal is carried through.

Birthing Centers↗

Labor admission test: an assessment of the test's value as screening for fetal distress in labor.

BACKGROUND: To determine if the labor admission test (LAT) can predict fetal distress in a population of laboring women, and in subgroups of low- or high-risk women, who delivered within six hours or between six and 24 hours after LAT. METHODS: The data charts of all women who delivered at Hammerfest Hospital in 1996, 1997 and 1998 were retrospectively read. If the woman was admitted to the hospital because of onset of labor, was in the first stage of labor and delivered within 24 hours after admission, she was included. In the study period, 1639 gave birth and 932 were included in the study. A descriptive analysis of the population and assessment of LAT's sensitivity, positive predictive value, specificity and negative predictive value at different cut-off values was done. RESULTS: In the study population 5.8% had fetal distress, and 5.3% had an operative delivery because of fetal distress. LAT's sensitivity in the whole population was 0.15 and positive predictive value was 0.16. Specificity was 0.95 and positive predictive value was 0.95. In the subgroups of low- and high-risk women, who delivered within six hours or between six and 24 hours after LAT, sensitivity varied between 0 and 0.36, and positive predictive value varied between 0 and 0.27. Specificity varied between 0.92 and 0.96, and negative predictive value varied between 0.89 and 0.97. CONCLUSIONS: According to these results, LAT cannot be recommended as a screening test for fetal distress in labor in low-risk women. Sensitivity is too low, and there are too many false-positive tests. It is unclear if LAT has benefits among high-risk women.

Adult↗