Uterine balloon tamponade for the treatment of postpartum haemorrhage in resource-poor settings: a systematic review

Division of Global Health and Human Rights, Department of Emergency Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA PATH, Seattle, WA, USA Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA Division of Pediatrics, Children's Hospital Boston, Boston, MA, USA Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology (Impact Factor: 3.86). 08/2012; 120(1). DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2012.03454.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Background Effective interventions addressing postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) are critically needed to reduce maternal mortality worldwide. Uterine balloon tamponade (UBT) has been shown to be an effective technique to treat PPH in developed countries, but has not been examined in resource-poor settings. Objectives This literature review examines the effectiveness of UBT for the treatment and management of PPH in resource-poor settings. Search strategy Publications were sought through searches of five electronic databases: Medline, Cochrane Reference Libraries, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Embase and Popline. Selection criteria Titles and abstracts were screened for eligibility by two independent reviewers. Each reviewer evaluated the full text of potentially eligible articles by defined inclusion criteria, including the presentation of empirical data and use of UBT in resource-poor settings to treat PPH. Data collection and analysis Full text of all eligible publications was collected and systematically coded. Main results The search identified 13 studies that met the inclusion criteria: six case reports or case series, five prospective studies and two retrospective studies for a total of 241 women. No randomised controlled trials were identified. The studies used various types of UBT, including condom catheter (n = 193), Foley catheter (n = 5) and SengstakenBlakemore oesophageal tube (n = 1). In these studies, primarily conducted in tertiary-care settings rather than lower-level health facilities, UBT successfully treated PPH in 234 out of 241 women. Conclusions UBT is an effective treatment for PPH in resource-poor settings. Further study of UBT interventions is necessary to better understand the barriers to successful implementation and use in these settings.

1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: To determine whether use of uterine balloon tamponade (UBT) for management of uncontrolled postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) by community-based providers in a resource-limited setting could be feasible, effective, and safe. METHODS: In rural South Sudan, community providers were trained and equipped with a simple UBT device consisting of a catheter, condom, and syringe. Snowball sampling identified cases of UBT use since training. Semi-structured interviews were conducted among community providers, referral facility providers, patients, and patient family members. Interview transcripts were analyzed using qualitative methods. RESULTS: Thirteen cases were identified and 24 interviews related to community-based UBT use were conducted. Qualitative analysis revealed several major themes. Community providers applied UBT in appropriate clinical situations. UBT was effective for controlling PPH, even among severely ill patients. Referral was difficult and lengthy owing to the austere setting, but simple UBT appeared to mitigate these challenges. Communities had some initial fears, yet ultimately embraced UBT. Equipment and supplies were largely maintained. There was universal satisfaction with UBT among patients, family members, and providers. One death occurred among the 13 cases, although it was probably not attributable to PPH. CONCLUSION: Training and UBT device provision are simple, affordable, and effective for managing uncontrolled PPH in a resource-limited setting.
    International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics 04/2013; 122(1). DOI:10.1016/j.ijgo.2013.02.017 · 1.56 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: PATH, an international nonprofit organization, assessed nearly 40 technologies for their potential to reduce maternal mortality from postpartum hemorrhage and preeclampsia and eclampsia in low-resource settings. The evaluation used a new Excel-based prioritization tool covering 22 criteria developed by PATH, the Maternal and Neonatal Directed Assessment of Technology (MANDATE) model, and consultations with experts. It identified five innovations with especially high potential: technologies to improve use of oxytocin, a uterine balloon tamponade, simplified dosing of magnesium sulfate, an improved proteinuria test, and better blood pressure measurement devices. Investments are needed to realize the potential of these technologies to reduce mortality.
    BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 01/2014; 14(1):10. DOI:10.1186/1471-2393-14-10 · 2.15 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) is the largest contributor to maternal mortality, occurring in between 1 and 5% of deliveries. Prophylactic uterotonics are widely recommended to prevent atonic hemorrhage. Rapid recognition of PPH and identification of hemorrhage etiology is essential to reduce mortality and morbidity. Treatment is etiology-specific and comprises a range of medical, mechanical, temporizing and surgical procedures. Important developments from trauma and emergency medicine around massive hemorrhage protocols are newly implemented for PPH, and the evidence base for PPH medical management is expanding, with clinical trials ongoing. Improving the management of PPH in limited-resource settings will require continued attention to ensure the availability of low-cost accessible prevention and treatment options, in addition to a focus on skilled care providers.
    Expert Review of Obstetrics &amp Gynecology 01/2014; 8(6). DOI:10.1586/17474108.2013.847622