Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Admission and partograph use

From: Stillbirths and quality of care during labour at the low resource referral hospital of Zanzibar: a case-control study

  Case-control study BW ≥2000 g
Cases Pre-hosp. stillbirths Cases Intra-hosp. Stillbirths Controls Apgar 710
N (%)
Progress on admission and referrals
Of all women in the study: (n = 67) (n = 72) (n = 249)
  Before labour paina 5 (7.5 %) 2 (2.8 %) 12 (4.8 %)
  Latent phase of laboura,b 18 (26.9 %) 40 (55.6 %) 56 (22.5 %)
  First stage of labour 23 (34.3 %) 29 (40.3 %) 153 (61.4 %)
  Second stage of labour 15 (22.4 %) 0 (0.0 %) 25 (10.0 %)
  Stage of labour on admission unknown 6 (9.0 %) 1 (1.4 %) 3 (1.2 %)
  Referral from smaller health centrec 10 (14.9 %) 11 (15.3 %) 12 (4.8 %)
Partograph use
Of women in first stage of labour: (n = 39) (n = 69) (n = 207)
  The partograph at least partially appliedd 27 (69.2 %) 66 (95.7 %) 183 (88.0 %)
Of women with the partograph applied: (n = 27) (n = 66) (n = 183)
  First cervical dilatation in active labour plotted correctly on the alert line 18 (66.7 %) 53 (80.3 %) 166 (90.7 %)
  1. BW birthweight, CI confidence interval, OR odds ratio
  2. aDifference in women admitted before active labour between intra-hospital stillbirths and controls: OR 3.79, 95 % CI 2.19–6.57
  3. bCervical dilatation <4 cm
  4. cDifference between intra-hospital stillbirths and controls: OR 3.52, 95 % CI 1.67–7.39
  5. dDifference between pre-hospital stillbirths and both intra-hospital stillbirths and controls: OR 9.78, 95 % CI 2.56–37.42, and OR 3.39, 95 % CI 1.52–7.56, respectively