National Cross Sectional Survey to Determine Whether the Decision to Delivery Interval is Critical in Emergency Caesarean Section

Overview

Journal BMJ

Specialty General Medicine

Date 2004 Mar 17

PMID 15023829

Citations 29

Authors

Jane Thomas

Shantini Paranjothy

David James

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: To examine the association between decision to delivery interval and maternal and baby outcomes.

Design: National cross sectional survey.

Setting: Maternity units in England and Wales. SUBJECTS REVIEWED: 17 780 singleton births (99% of all births) delivered by emergency caesarean section in England and Wales between 1 May 2000 and 31 July 2000.

Main Outcome Measures: Association between decision to delivery interval and baby outcomes (Apgar scores of < 7 and < 4 at five minutes and stillbirth) and maternal outcomes (requirement for special care additional to routine care after caesarean section and where care was provided).

Results: Compared with babies delivered within 15 minutes, there was no difference in maternal or baby outcome for decision to delivery interval between 16 and 75 minutes. After 75 minutes, however, there was a significantly higher odds of a five minute Apgar score of < 7 (odds ratio 1.7, 95% confidence interval 1.2 to 2.4), and 50% increase in odds of special care additional to routine care for mothers.

Conclusion: A decision to delivery interval of 30 minutes is not an absolute threshold for influencing baby outcome. Decision to delivery intervals of more than 75 minutes are associated with poorer maternal and baby outcomes and should be avoided.

Citing Articles

The traumatic childbirth experience of mothers after emergency cesarean section(EmCS) in China: a descriptive qualitative study.

Ma L, Chong M, Lee W, Yang H, Lian Y BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2025; 25(1):209.

PMID: 40011814 PMC: 11863862. DOI: 10.1186/s12884-025-07213-y.

Effect of Anesthetic Modality on Decision-to-Delivery Interval and Maternal-Neonatal Outcomes in Category 2 and 3 Cesarean Deliveries.

Peclin P, Pavlica M, Druskovic M, Kavsek G, Verdenik I, Pintaric T J Clin Med. 2025; 13(24.

PMID: 39768451 PMC: 11728020. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13247528.

Association between decision-to-delivery time and neonatal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Shen J, Shi M BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2024; 24(1):410.

PMID: 38849748 PMC: 11157931. DOI: 10.1186/s12884-024-06603-y.

Effect of Decision-to-Delivery Time of Emergency Cesarean Section on Adverse Newborn Outcomes at East Gojjam Zone Public Hospital, Ethiopia, March 2023: Multicenter Prospective Observational Study Design.

Damtew B, Gudayu T, Temesgan W, Hailu A Int J Womens Health. 2024; 16:433-450.

PMID: 38469355 PMC: 10926860. DOI: 10.2147/IJWH.S451101.

Decision to delivery interval, maternal and fetal outcomes in emergency caesarean sections in a tertiary teaching hospital, Dar es salaam, Tanzania.

Wangwe P, Kibwana M, August F, Kikula A Afr Health Sci. 2024; 23(3):17-26.

PMID: 38357110 PMC: 10862602. DOI: 10.4314/ahs.v23i3.5.

References

Zeger S, Liang K . Longitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes. Biometrics. 1986; 42(1):121-30. View

Goodwin T, Belai I, Hernandez P, Durand M, Paul R . Asphyxial complications in the term newborn with severe umbilical acidemia. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992; 167(6):1506-12. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9378(92)91728-s. View

Hong J, Jee Y, Yoon H, Kim S . Comparison of general and epidural anesthesia in elective cesarean section for placenta previa totalis: maternal hemodynamics, blood loss and neonatal outcome. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2005; 12(1):12-6. DOI: 10.1016/s0959-289x(02)00183-8. View

Roemer V . [Emergency Cesarean section--basic data]. Z Geburtshilfe Perinatol. 1992; 196(3):95-9. View

MacKenzie I, Cooke I . What is a reasonable time from decision-to-delivery by caesarean section? Evidence from 415 deliveries. BJOG. 2002; 109(5):498-504. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2002.01323.x. View

Chauhan S, Roach H, Naef 2nd R, Magann E, Morrison J, Martin Jr J . Cesarean section for suspected fetal distress. Does the decision-incision time make a difference?. J Reprod Med. 1997; 42(6):347-52. View

Lertakyamanee J, Chinachoti T, Tritrakarn T, Muangkasem J, Somboonnanonda A, Kolatat T . Comparison of general and regional anesthesia for cesarean section: success rate, blood loss and satisfaction from a randomized trial. J Med Assoc Thai. 1999; 82(7):672-80. View

Kolatat T, Somboonnanonda A, Lertakyamanee J, Chinachot T, Tritrakarn T, Muangkasem J . Effects of general and regional anesthesia on the neonate (a prospective, randomized trial). J Med Assoc Thai. 1999; 82(1):40-5. View

Eddy J . Is childbirth safe in the UK and are there enough obstetricians? Letter to a chief executive. Hosp Med. 2000; 61(3):204-6. DOI: 10.12968/hosp.2000.61.3.1301. View

10.

MacKenzie I, Cooke I . Prospective 12 month study of 30 minute decision to delivery intervals for "emergency" caesarean section. BMJ. 2001; 322(7298):1334-5. PMC: 32165. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.322.7298.1334. View

11.

Schauberger C, Rooney B, Beguin E, SCHAPER A, Spindler J . Evaluating the thirty minute interval in emergency cesarean sections. J Am Coll Surg. 1994; 179(2):151-5. View

12.

Wallace D, Leveno K, Cunningham F, Giesecke A, Shearer V, Sidawi J . Randomized comparison of general and regional anesthesia for cesarean delivery in pregnancies complicated by severe preeclampsia. Obstet Gynecol. 1995; 86(2):193-9. DOI: 10.1016/0029-7844(95)00139-i. View

13.

James D . Caesarean section for fetal distress. BMJ. 2001; 322(7298):1316-7. PMC: 1120414. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.322.7298.1316. View

14.

Dick W, Traub E, Kraus H, Tollner U, Burghard R, Muck J . General anaesthesia versus epidural anaesthesia for primary caesarean section--a comparative study. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 1992; 9(1):15-21. View

15.

. ACOG technical bulletin. Fetal heart rate patterns: monitoring, interpretation, and management. Number 207--July 1995 (replaces No. 132, September 1989). Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1995; 51(1):65-74. View