Development of a Risk Screening Tool for Cephalopelvic Disproportion (CPD) in Pregnant Women at Ranong Hospital

Authors

  • Naiyana Thongsakul Obstetrician-Gynecologist, Ranong Hospital

Keywords:

Cephalopelvic Disproportion, screening tool, cut-off point

Abstract

     This study aimed to develop a risk screening tool for Cephalopelvic Disproportion (CPD) in pregnant women, determine an appropriate cut-off point using ROC curve analysis, and evaluate the tool's performance via sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC). A experimental research conducted between 2022 and 2024 across three phases. Phase 1 retrospectively analyzed 399 women who underwent cesarean section due to CPD (out of all deliveries during the study period), using logistic regression to identify risk factors. Phase 2 developed the screening tool by assigning weighted scores based on odds ratios, with content validity assessed by five experts. Phase 3 prospectively tested the tool in two rounds (n=229 and n=114).

     Phase 1 identified four statistically significant risk factors (p<0.05): primigravida (OR=3.45), estimated fetal weight ≥3,500 g (OR=2.87), fundal height ≥35 cm (OR=2.23), and gestational weight gain ≥15 kg (OR=1.89). Two additional factors were retained for clinical relevance: maternal height <150 cm and maternal age <19 or ≥35 years. These six factors formed the screening tool, with a maximum score of 8.5 and CVI = 0.92. Round 1 testing at the initial cut-off of 2.5 showed very low sensitivity (32.35%). ROC curve analysis and Youden's Index were used to revise the cut-off to 1.5. Round 2 testing (n=114) at cut-off 1.5 showed sensitivity 66.67%, specificity 59.26%, PPV 40.00%, NPV 81.36%, accuracy 61.40%, and AUC = 0.7153 (95% CI: 0.6134–0.8172), indicating fair-to-good performance per Mandrekar's (2010) criteria.

References

World Health Organization. (2021). Caesarean section rates continue to rise, amid growing inequalities in access. WHO. https://www.who.int/news/item/16-06-2021-caesarean-section-rates-continue-to-rise-amid-growing-inequalities-in-access

Betrán, A. P., Ye, J., Moller, A. B., Zhang, J., Gülmezoglu, A. M., & Torloni, M. R. (2016). The increasing trend in caesarean section rates: Global, regional and national estimates: 1990-2014. PLoS ONE, 11(2), e0148343. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0148343

Lumbiganon, P., Laopaiboon, M., Gülmezoglu, A. M., Souza, J. P., Taneepanichskul, S., Ruyan, P., ... & World Health Organization Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health Research Group. (2010). Method of delivery and pregnancy outcomes in Asia: The WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health 2007-08. The Lancet, 375(9713), 490-499. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61870-5

Cunningham, F. G., Leveno, K. J., Bloom, S. L., Dashe, J. S., Hoffman, B. L., Casey, B. M., & Spong, C. Y. (2018). Williams obstetrics (25th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

Khunpradit, S., Tavender, E., Lumbiganon, P., Laopaiboon, M., Wasiak, J., & Gruen, R. L. (2007). Non-clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean section. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2011(6), CD005528. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD005528.pub2

Saksangawong, C., Polsrisuthikul, T., Ratanasiri, T., & Komwilaisak, R. (2018). Development of a screening tool for prediction of cephalopelvic disproportion in term pregnant women. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research, 44(11), 2025-2031. https://doi.org/10.1111/jog.13762

กระทรวงสาธารณสุข. (2564). รายงานสถิติการผ่าตัดคลอดในโรงพยาบาลของรัฐ ปีงบประมาณ 2 กระทรวงสาธารณสุข.https://hdcservice.moph.go.th/hdc/reports/

Mandrekar, J. N. (2010). Receiver operating characteristic curve in diagnostic test assessment. Journal of Thoracic Oncology, 5(9), 1315-1316. https://doi.org/10.1097/JTO.0b013e3181ec173d

ชัยกิจ อุดแน่น. (2565). การพัฒนาแบบประเมินความเสี่ยงต่อการเกิด Cephalopelvic Disproportion ในโรงพยาบาลชุมชนภาคเหนือ. วารสารการพยาบาลและการดูแลสุขภาพ, 40(1), 112-125.

กฤติกัญจน์ ไทยศรีสุข. (2564). ความสัมพันธ์ระหว่างความสูงของมดลูกกับการเกิด Cephalopelvic Disproportion ในหญิงตั้งครรภ์. วารสารพยาบาลสาธารณสุข, 35(2), 45-58.

Lynn, M. R. (1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research, 35, 382-385.

Polit, D.F., & Beck, C.T. (2006). The content validity index: Are you sure you know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations [Electronic version]. Research in Nursing & Health, 29, 489-497.

Downloads

Published

2026-06-30

How to Cite

Thongsakul, N. (2026). Development of a Risk Screening Tool for Cephalopelvic Disproportion (CPD) in Pregnant Women at Ranong Hospital. Journal of Environmental Education Medical and Health, 11(2), 1725–1736. retrieved from https://so06.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/hej/article/view/296541