{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,11,2]],"date-time":"2026-11-02T11:05:15Z","timestamp":1793617515681,"version":"4.5.0"},"reference-count":14,"publisher":"Wiley","issue":"5","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2003,12,22]],"date-time":"2003-12-22T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1072051200000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":600,"URL":"http:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/termsAndConditions#vor"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["BJOG"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2002,5]]},"abstract":"<jats:p><jats:bold>Objective\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/jats:bold> To evaluate whether a 30\u2010minute decision\u2010to\u2010delivery interval is a realistic target for emergency caesarean section.<\/jats:p><jats:p><jats:bold>Design\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/jats:bold> An audit of all emergency caesarean sections over five separate periods.<\/jats:p><jats:p><jats:bold>Setting\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/jats:bold> A district general hospital.<\/jats:p><jats:p><jats:bold>Participants\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/jats:bold> Five groups of women (343 women) with an indication for emergency caesarean section.<\/jats:p><jats:p><jats:bold>Methods\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/jats:bold> Following an initial survey, a structured time sheet was introduced, followed by four other surveys to complete the audit cycle.<\/jats:p><jats:p><jats:bold>Main outcome measure\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/jats:bold> The proportion of caesarean sections where the decision\u2010to\u2010delivery interval measures was achieved within 30 minutes. The reasons for delay.<\/jats:p><jats:p><jats:bold>Results\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/jats:bold> In the first survey of 73 emergency caesarean sections, the time to deliver the infant exceeded 30 minutes in 47 women (64%). The main sources of delay were transferring the women to the operating theatre and starting the anaesthetic. After the introduction of a structured time sheet, there was an improvement with each survey, but the target of 30 minutes was reached in only 71% of caesarean sections in the final survey.<\/jats:p><jats:p><jats:bold>Conclusions\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/jats:bold> The introduction of a time sheet can improve the decision\u2010to\u2010delivery interval for emergency caesarean section; however, a universal standard of 100% in 30 minutes is unrealistic.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1471-0528.2002.00491.x","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2003,12,22]],"date-time":"2003-12-22T16:13:58Z","timestamp":1072109638000},"page":"505-508","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":53,"title":["The decision\u2010to\u2010delivery interval for emergency caesarean section: is 30 minutes a realistic target?"],"prefix":"10.1111","volume":"109","author":[{"given":"W.H.","family":"Helmy","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"A.S.","family":"Jolaoso","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"O.O.","family":"Ifaturoti","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"S.A.","family":"Afify","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"M.H.","family":"Jones","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"311","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2003,12,22]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_2_6_2_2","unstructured":"CESDI. Care during labour and delivery. 4th Annual Report 1 January\u201331 December 1995 35."},{"key":"e_1_2_6_3_2","unstructured":"CNST. Risk Management Standards. November 1999."},{"key":"e_1_2_6_4_2","unstructured":"CESDI. 7th Annual Report 2000:50."},{"key":"e_1_2_6_5_2","volume-title":"Guidelines for Obstetric Anaesthesia Services","author":"Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain & Ireland and Obstetric Anaesthetists Association","year":"1998"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_6_2","volume-title":"Audit in Obstetrics & Gynaecology: Achieving Changes with Audit","author":"Tuffnell DJ","year":"1998"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_7_2","unstructured":"DwyerJP.Decision to delivery time in emergency caesarean section [abstract].Fourth International Scientific Meeting of the Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists. Cape Town South Africa 4\u20136 October 1999."},{"key":"e_1_2_6_8_2","first-page":"151","article-title":"Evaluating the 30 minute interval in emergency caesarean sections","volume":"179","author":"Schauberger CW","year":"1994","journal-title":"Am J Surg"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_9_2","unstructured":"American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists.Guidelines for Vaginal Delivery after a Previous Caesarean Birth. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 64. Washington DC: ACOG 1988."},{"key":"e_1_2_6_10_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/014107680009300703"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_11_2","unstructured":"American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists.Fetal Distress and Birth Asphyxia. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 137. Washington DC: ACOG 1994:7"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_12_2","first-page":"95","article-title":"Emergency caesarean section: basic data","volume":"196","author":"Roemer VM","year":"1992","journal-title":"Z Geburtschilfe Perinatol"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_13_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0002-9378(85)90334-5"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_14_2","first-page":"347","article-title":"Caesarean section for suspected fetal distress: does the decision to interval time make a difference?","volume":"42","author":"Chauhan SP","year":"1997","journal-title":"J Reprod Med"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_15_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1471-0528.2000.tb13263.x"}],"container-title":["BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics &amp; Gynaecology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/api.wiley.com\/onlinelibrary\/tdm\/v1\/articles\/10.1111%2Fj.1471-0528.2002.00491.x","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1111\/j.1471-0528.2002.00491.x","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2023,10,17]],"date-time":"2023-10-17T15:13:44Z","timestamp":1697555624000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.1111\/j.1471-0528.2002.00491.x"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2002,5]]},"references-count":14,"journal-issue":{"issue":"5","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2002,5]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1111\/j.1471-0528.2002.00491.x"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/j.1471-0528.2002.00491.x","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["1470-0328","1471-0528"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1470-0328","type":"print"},{"value":"1471-0528","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2002,5]]},"assertion":[{"value":"2003-12-22","order":2,"name":"published","label":"Published","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}}]}}