Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/13780
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBarden, Nadiaen_US
dc.contributor.authorCarins, Thomas Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorHannigan, Yolandaen_US
dc.contributor.authorMcCarthy, Elizabeth Anneen_US
dc.contributor.authorShub, Alexisen_US
dc.contributor.authorWalker, Susan Pen_US
dc.date.accessioned2016-05-17T05:14:06Z-
dc.date.available2016-05-17T05:14:06Z-
dc.date.issued2015-11-18en
dc.identifier.citationBMJ Open 2015, vol. 5(11) p.e009492en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/13780-
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE: We asked whether 60 compared with 240 min observation is sufficiently informative and safe for pregnancy day assessment (PDAC) of suspected pre-eclampsia (PE). DESIGN: A retrospective study of 209 pregnant women (475 PDAC assessments, 6 months) with routinely collected blood pressure (BP), symptom and laboratory information. We proposed a 60 min screening algorithm comprising: absence of symptoms, normal laboratory parameters and ≤1high-BP reading (systolic blood pressure, SBP 140 mm Hg or higher or diastolic blood pressure, DBP 90 mm Hg or higher). We also evaluated two less inclusive screening algorithms. We determined short-term outcomes (within 4 h): severe hypertension, proteinuric hypertension and pregnancy-induced hypertension, as well as long-term outcome: PE-related diagnoses up to the early puerperium. We assessed performance of alternate screening algorithms performance using 2×2 tables. RESULTS: 1 in 3 women met all screen negative criteria at 1 h. Their risk of hypertension requiring treatment in the next 3 h was 1.8% and of failing to diagnose proteinuric hypertensive PE at 4 h was 5.1%. If BP triggers were 5 mm Hg lower, 1 in 6 women would be screen-negative of whom 1.1% subsequently develops treatment-requiring hypertension and 4.5% demonstrate short-term proteinuric hypertension. We present sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive likelihood ratios for alternate screening algorithms. CONCLUSIONS: We endorse further research into the safest screening test where women are considered for discharge after 60 min. Safety, patient and staff satisfaction should be assessed prospectively. Any screening test should be used in conjunction with good clinical care to minimise maternal and perinatal hazards of PE.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.titleEffectiveness and safety of 1 vs 4 h blood pressure profile with clinical and laboratory assessment for the exclusion of gestational hypertension and pre-eclampsia: a retrospective study in a university affiliated maternity hospitalen_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.identifier.journaltitleBMJ Openen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationDepartment of Emergency, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationDepartment of Medicine, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationDepartment of Perinatal Medicine, Mercy Hospital for Women, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Melbourne, Mercy Hospital for Women, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.identifier.pubmedurihttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26582404en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009492en_US
dc.type.austinJournal Articleen_US
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.openairetypeJournal Article-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.grantfulltextnone-
Appears in Collections:Journal articles
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

12
checked on Jun 14, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.