ArticleHealth science reports2022
Lessons learned from the perinatal audit of uterine rupture in the Netherlands: A mixed-method study.
Article in Health science reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lessons learned from nationwide perinatal audit of severe postpartum haemorrhage in the Netherlands.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2026Article
- Navigating the Complex Terrain of Obstetrics and Gynecology Malpractice: Stakeholders, Expectations, and Legal Implications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Suboptimal factors in maternal and newborn care for refugees: Lessons learned from perinatal audits in the Netherlands.PloS one · 2024Article
- Lessons learned from the perinatal audit of uterine rupture in the Netherlands: A mixed-method study.Health science reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: To analyze outcomes of nationwide local audits of uterine rupture to draw lessons for clinical care. Methods: Descriptive cohort study. Critical incident audit sessions within all local perinatal cooperation groups in the Netherlands. Women who sustained uterine rupture between January 1st, 2017 and December 31st, 2019. Main Outcome Measures: Improvable factors, recommendations, and lessons learned for clinical care. Women's case histories were discussed in multidisciplinary perinatal audit sessions. Participants evaluated care against national and local clinical guidelines and common professional standards to identify improvable factors. Cases and outcomes were registered in a nationwide database. Results: One hundred and fourteen women who sustained uterine rupture were discussed in local perinatal audit sessions by 40-60 participants on average: A total of 111 (97%) were multiparous of whom 107 (94%) had given birth by cesarean section in a previous pregnancy. The audit revealed 178 improvable factors and 200 recommendations. Six percent ( Conclusions: Through a nationwide incident audit of uterine rupture, we identified improvable factors related to communication, documentation, and organization of care. Lessons learned include "speaking up," improving the transfer of information and team training are crucial to reduce the incidence of uterine rupture.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.