- Page 1 and 2:
Confidential Enquiry into Maternal
- Page 3 and 4:
Contents Acknowledgements .........
- Page 5 and 6:
• Members of the CEMACH Diabetes
- Page 7 and 8:
Erb’s palsy Injury to the nerve r
- Page 9 and 10:
Neonatal unit A unit which provides
- Page 11 and 12:
Foreword This third and fi nal repo
- Page 13 and 14:
1. Introduction This is the fi nal
- Page 15 and 16:
2. Key fi ndings of the CEMACH Diab
- Page 17 and 18:
Suboptimal fetal surveillance of ba
- Page 19 and 20:
3. Summary of recommendations This
- Page 21 and 22:
2. Patient pathways of care includi
- Page 23 and 24:
the pregnancies meeting this defi n
- Page 25 and 26:
in order to remove any identifi abl
- Page 27 and 28:
When deriving odds ratios for any p
- Page 29 and 30:
Associations are reported in Chapte
- Page 31 and 32:
Table 5.1 Characteristics of women
- Page 33 and 34:
Table 5.4 Characteristics of women
- Page 35 and 36:
was no information available to pan
- Page 37 and 38:
6. Factors associated with poor pre
- Page 39 and 40:
Table 6.2 Association of clinical c
- Page 41 and 42:
Table 6.5 Association of specifi c
- Page 43 and 44:
Table 6.8 Association of postnatal
- Page 45 and 46:
folic acid before pregnancy (19% of
- Page 47 and 48:
Table 7.2 Panel comments on social
- Page 49 and 50:
7.5 Conclusions One of the key fi n
- Page 51 and 52:
11.Dex S, Heather J (eds). Millenni
- Page 53 and 54:
8. Clinical care issues: preconcept
- Page 55 and 56:
chance of induction of labour was r
- Page 57 and 58:
8.6.1 Enquiry fi ndings Just over h
- Page 59 and 60: Some quotes from the panel discussi
- Page 61 and 62: Apart from the explanation of pregn
- Page 63 and 64: was associated with poor pregnancy
- Page 65 and 66: of women after the fi rst trimester
- Page 67 and 68: 9.5.1 Panel comments on suboptimal
- Page 69 and 70: During labour and delivery, the maj
- Page 71 and 72: Just 52% of 383 women (38% of 164 c
- Page 73 and 74: • ‘No serial growth scans perfo
- Page 75 and 76: The panel enquiries, which are in e
- Page 77 and 78: 10.3.1 Enquiry fi ndings Seventy fi
- Page 79 and 80: 10.6 Communication Effective commun
- Page 81 and 82: Some quotes from the panel discussi
- Page 83 and 84: working between primary and seconda
- Page 85 and 86: we therefore selected 7.2% of pregn
- Page 87 and 88: 11.4 Preconception behaviour The CE
- Page 89 and 90: enquiry related to a 12 month prior
- Page 91 and 92: Table 11.10 Differences in postnata
- Page 93 and 94: Type 1 and type 2 diabetes have tra
- Page 95 and 96: Panels were chaired by the panel ch
- Page 97 and 98: In 57% (24/42) of cases, a junior d
- Page 99 and 100: Infant formula given as fi rst feed
- Page 101 and 102: 2.1 hours in babies remaining with
- Page 103 and 104: 12.7.1 Panel comments on suboptimal
- Page 105 and 106: The concerns described here probabl
- Page 107 and 108: External commentary Patricia Hamilt
- Page 109: informed and motivated to manage th
- Page 113 and 114: 101
- Page 115 and 116: 103
- Page 117 and 118: 105
- Page 119 and 120: 107
- Page 121 and 122: 109
- Page 123 and 124: 111
- Page 125 and 126: 113
- Page 127 and 128: 115
- Page 129 and 130: 117
- Page 131 and 132: 119
- Page 133 and 134: Association of social and lifestyle
- Page 135 and 136: Association of diabetes care factor
- Page 137 and 138: Appendix D Association of demograph
- Page 139 and 140: Association of preconception care f
- Page 141 and 142: Association of postnatal care facto
- Page 143 and 144: Association between social and life
- Page 145 and 146: Association between diabetes care f
- Page 147 and 148: Appendix F - CEMACH advisory groups
- Page 149 and 150: Peer Reviewers Tim Clayton Anne Dor
- Page 152: Published February 2007 by CEMACH C