Dataset Information

Caesarean section surgical techniques: 3 year follow-up of the CORONIS fractional, factorial, unmasked, randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The CORONIS trial reported differences in short-term maternal morbidity when comparing five pairs of alternative surgical techniques for caesarean section. Here we report outcomes at 3 years follow-up.

Methods

The CORONIS trial was a pragmatic international 2 × 2 × 2 × 2× 2 non-regular fractional, factorial, unmasked, randomised controlled trial done at 19 sites in Argentina, Chile, Ghana, India, Kenya, Pakistan, and Sudan. Pregnant women were eligible if they were to undergo their first or second caesarean section through a planned transverse abdominal incision. Women were randomly assigned by a secure web-based allocation system to one intervention from each of the three assigned pairs. All investigators, surgeons, and participants were unmasked to treatment allocation. In this follow-up study, we compared outcomes at 3 years following blunt versus sharp abdominal entry, exteriorisation of the uterus for repair versus intra-abdominal repair, single versus double layer closure of the uterus, closure versus non-closure of the peritoneum, and chromic catgut versus polyglactin-910 for uterine repair. Outcomes included pelvic pain; deep dyspareunia; hysterectomy and outcomes of subsequent pregnancies. Outcomes were assessed masked to the original trial allocation. This trial is registered with the Current Controlled Trials registry, number ISRCTN31089967.

Findings

Between Sept 1, 2011, and Sept 30, 2014, 13,153 (84%) women were followed-up for a mean duration of 3·8 years (SD 0·86). For blunt versus sharp abdominal entry there was no evidence of a difference in risk of abdominal hernias (adjusted RR 0·66; 95% CI 0·39-1·11). We also recorded no evidence of a difference in risk of death or serious morbidity of the children born at the time of trial entry (0·99, 0·83-1·17). For exteriorisation of the uterus versus intra-abdominal repair there was no evidence of a difference in risk of infertility (0·91, 0·71-1·18) or of ectopic pregnancy (0·50, 0·15-1·66). For single versus double layer closure of the uterus there was no evidence of a difference in maternal death (0·78, 0·46-1·32) or a composite of pregnancy complications (1·20, 0·75-1·90). For closure versus non-closure of the peritoneum there was no evidence of a difference in any outcomes relating to symptoms associated with pelvic adhesions such as infertility (0·80, 0·61-1·06). For chromic catgut versus polyglactin-910 sutures there was no evidence of a difference in the main comparisons for adverse pregnancy outcomes in a subsequent pregnancy, such as uterine rupture (3·05, 0·32-29·29). Overall, severe adverse outcomes were uncommon in these settings.

Interpretation

Although our study was not powered to detect modest differences in rare but serious events, there was no evidence to favour one technique over another. Other considerations will probably affect clinical practice, such as the time and cost saving of different approaches.

Funding

UK Medical Research Council and the Department for International Development.

SUBMITTER: CORONIS collaborative group

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4930950 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAudit and feedback aims to improve patient care by comparing healthcare performance against explicit standards. It is used to monitor and improve patient care, including through National Clinical Audit (NCA) programmes in the UK. Variability in effectiveness of audit and feedback is attributed to intervention design; separate randomised trials to address multiple questions about how to optimise effectiveness would be inefficient. We evaluated different feedback modifications to identify leading candidates for further "real-world" evaluation.MethodsUsing an online fractional factorial screening experiment, we randomised recipients of feedback from five UK NCAs to different combinations of six feedback modifications applied within an audit report excerpt: use effective comparators, provide multimodal feedback, recommend specific actions, provide optional detail, incorporate the patient voice, and minimise cognitive load. Outcomes, assessed immediately after exposure to the online modifications, included intention to enact audit standards (primary outcome, ranked on a scale of -3 to +3, tailored to the NCA), comprehension, user experience, and engagement.ResultsWe randomised 1241 participants (clinicians, managers, and audit staff) between April and October 2019. Inappropriate repeated participant completion occurred; we conservatively excluded participant entries during the relevant period, leaving a primary analysis population of 638 (51.4%) participants. None of the six feedback modifications had an independent effect on intention across the five NCAs. We observed both synergistic and antagonistic effects across outcomes when modifications were combined; the specific NCA and whether recipients had a clinical role had dominant influences on outcome, and there was an antagonistic interaction between multimodal feedback and optional detail. Among clinical participants, predicted intention ranged from 1.22 (95% confidence interval 0.72, 1.72) for the least effective combination in which multimodal feedback, optional detail, and reduced cognitive load were applied within the audit report, up to 2.40 (95% CI 1.88, 2.93) for the most effective combination including multimodal feedback, specific actions, patient voice, and reduced cognitive load.ConclusionPotentially important synergistic and antagonistic effects were identified across combinations of feedback modifications, audit programmes, and recipients, suggesting that feedback designers must explicitly consider how different features of feedback may interact to achieve (or undermine) the desired effects.Trial registrationInternational Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number: ISRCTN41584028.

Project description:BackgroundCaesarean sections account for roughly one third of all surgical procedures performed in low-income countries. Due to lack of standardised post-discharge follow-up protocols and practices, most of available data are extracted from clinical charts during hospitalization and are thus sub-optimal for answering post-discharge outcomes questions. This study aims to determine enablers and barriers to returning to the hospital after discharge among women who have undergone a c-section at a rural district hospital in Rwanda.MethodsWomen aged ≥ 18 years who underwent c-section at Kirehe District Hospital in rural Rwanda in the period March to October 2017 were prospectively followed. A structured questionnaire was administered to participants and clinical data were extracted from medical files between March and October 2017. At discharge, consenting women were given an appointment to return for follow-up on postoperative day 10 (POD 10) (± 3 days) and provided a voucher to cover transport and compensation for participation to be redeemed on their return. Study participants received a reminder call on the eve of their scheduled appointment. We used a backward stepwise logistic regression, at an α = 0.05 significance level, to identify enablers and barriers associated with post-discharge follow-up return.ResultsOf 586 study participants, the majority (62.6%) were between 21-30 years old and 86.4% had a phone contact number. Of those eligible, 90.4% returned for follow-up. The predictors of return were counselling by a female data collector (OR = 9.85, 95%CI:1.43-37.59) and receiving a reminder call (OR = 16.47, 95%CI:7.07-38.38). Having no insurance reduced the odds of returning to follow-up (OR = 0.03, 95%CI:0.03-0.23), and those who spent more than 10.6 Euro for transport to and from the hospital were less likely to return to follow-up (OR = 0.14, 95%CI:0.04- 0.50).ConclusionmHealh interventions using calls or notifications can increase the post-discharge follow-up uptake. The reminder calls to patients and discharge counselling by a gender-matching provider had a positive effect on return to care. Further interventions are needed targeting the uninsured and patients facing transportation hardship. Additionally, association between counselling of women patients by a female data collector and greater return to follow-up needs further exploration to optimize counselling procedures.