不同分娩方式高危产妇产褥期感染相关因素及对新生儿的影响

Related factors for postpartum infections in high-risk puerpera undergoing different delivery methods and impact on newborns

  • 摘要: 目的 探讨高危产妇产褥期感染的相关因素,及不同分娩方式对高危产妇产褥期感染对新生儿的影响。方法 选择2016年1月-2017年1月于医院分娩的800例产妇为研究对象,根据分娩方式不同分为:自然阴道分娩组300例、剖宫产组300例、择期引产组200例。观察各组产妇的产时情况,并进行新生儿Apgar评分,并对产褥期感染的相关因素进行分析。结果 择期引产组产时输血率为5.00%(10/200)高于剖宫产组0.67%(2/300)(P=0.002)。自然阴道分娩组产时损伤率为2.67%(8/300)高于剖宫产组0(P=0.004)。自然阴道分娩组产褥期感染率为2.67%(8/300)低于剖宫产组8.67(26/300)、择期引产组15.00%(30/200)(P<0.001)。剖宫产组产后尿潴留发生率为0低于自然阴道分娩组、择期引产组(P均<0.001)。自然阴道分娩组住院天数为(4.61±0.52)天少于剖宫产组、择期引产组(P<0.05)。自然阴道分娩组、择期引产组轻度窒息发生率分别为15.00%(45/300)、15.00%(30/200)高于剖宫产组8.33%(25/300)(P<0.05)。三组新生儿Apgar评分差异无统计学意义;妊娠期高血压、妊娠糖尿病、妊娠期贫血、羊水污染、胎膜早破、剖宫产、产钳/胎头吸引是产妇产褥期感染的相关因素,护理干预是其保护因素(P<0.05)。结论 剖宫产可减少分娩并发症,但住院时间较长;择期引产输血率、产后出血率均较高,切口愈合缓慢,应针对感染相关因素采取干预措施。

     

    Abstract: OBJECTIVE To explore the associated risk factors of high-risk maternal puerperal infection and effects of different delivery methods on high-risk maternal puerperal infection and the newborns. METHODS A total of 800 cases of maternal in our hospital from Jan. 2016 to Jan. 2017 were selected. According to different delivery methods, the patients were divided into natural vaginal delivery group (300 cases), cesarean section group (300 cases), and induced labor group (200 cases). The intrapartum situation of maternal and neonatal Apgar score of each group were observed, and the related risk factors for puerperal infection were analyzed. RESULTS The blood transfusion rate in induced labor group was 5.0%(10/200), which was significantly higher than 0.67%(2/300) in cesarean section group(P=0.005). The birth canal damage rate of natural vaginal delivery group was 2.67%(8/300), which was significantly higher than 0 of the cesarean section group(P=0.007). Puerperal infection rate of natural vaginal delivery group was 2.67%(8/300), which was significantly lower than 8.67%(26/300) of cesarean section group and 15.00%(30/200) of induced labor group(P<0.001). Urinary retention rate of cesarean section group was significantly lower than that of natural vaginal delivery group and induced labor group(P<0.05). Hospitalization days of natural vaginal delivery group were (4.61±0.52)d, which were significantly less than those of the other two groups (P<0.05). Mild asphyxia rates of natural vaginal delivery group and induced labor group were 15.00%(45/300) and 15.00%(30/200), which were significantly higher than 8.33%(25/300) of cesarean delivery group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in Apgar score among the three groups of newborns. Gestational hypertension, gestational diabetes, gestational anemia, amniotic fluid contamination, premature rupture of membranes, cesarean delivery, forceps/fetal head were risk factors of maternal puerperal infection, and nursing intervention was the protective factor (P<0.05). CONCLUSION Cesarean section can reduce childbirth complications, but has a longer hospital stay. Induced labor has higher postpartum transfusion and postpartum hemorrhage rates, and the incision healing is slow. Interventions should be taken according to related factors of infection.

     

/

返回文章
返回