ArticleCureus2024
Impact of the Early COVID-19 Pandemic on the Quality of Obstetric Care in a Tertiary Care Center in Karachi, Pakistan.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective This study aimed to assess the indirect impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on obstetric quality measures. Materials and methods This cross-sectional study was conducted at a private-sector tertiary care hospital in Karachi, Pakistan. Data were collected for specific antenatal, intrapartum, and postpartum care indicators during the initial six months of the COVID-19 phase (March to August 2020) and compared with baseline measures from the preceding six months before the COVID-19 phase (September 2019 to February 2020) using frequencies and percentages. Results During COVID-19, there was a 10% reduction (pre-COVID: 1041 and during COVID: 946) in outpatient obstetric volumes and a 65% increase (pre-COVID: 240 and during COVID: 396) in clinic cancellations, indicating a decreased influx of antenatal patients. Teleclinics served 8.3% (1429/18279) of the total obstetric patients during this period. Marginal decreases were observed in spontaneous vaginal deliveries 1358 (44%) vs 1049 (42.4%) and labor induction rates 818 (26.6%) vs 606 (24.2%). Additionally, there was a slight increase in instrumental deliveries, 121 (3.9%) vs 114 (4.6%) during the COVID phase. However, these changes were not statistically significant. Similarly, no substantial impact was observed on elective and emergency C-sections. Notably, there were more cases of primary postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) during the COVID-19 phase 36 (1.17%) vs 46 (1.86%), and these changes were statistically significant (p= 0.035). Similar trends were observed for eclampsia (p =0.05) and preeclampsia cases (p-value 0.074). However, other maternal morbidity indicators and intrauterine fetal deaths remained relatively unchanged. NICU admissions increased significantly (p=0.001), while early neonatal deaths remained unaffected. Patient satisfaction rates remained steady for inpatients and improved for outpatients during COVID-19. Conclusion The COVID-19 pandemic primarily affected antenatal volumes, neonatal admissions, and maternal morbidity indicators such as PPH, preeclampsia, and eclampsia. Despite the challenges, patient satisfaction and quality care standards were maintained during COVID-19 through new strategies and revised patient care processes.
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.