Why group & save? Blood transfusion at low-risk elective caesarean section


  • Owen Stock,

    Corresponding author
    1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Mercy Hospital for Women, The University of Melbourne, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia
    • Correspondence: Dr Owen Stock, Mercy Hospital for Women, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The University of Melbourne, 163 Studley Road, Heidelberg, Vic. 3084, Australia. Email: ostock@student.unimelb.edu.au

    Search for more papers by this author
  • Michael Beckmann

    1. Director of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Women's Health and Newborn Services, Mater Research and the Mater Mothers Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author


Women undergoing elective caesarean section (CS) routinely have a group and save ordered as part of their preoperative assessment, whereas women with expected vaginal birth do not. Our aim was therefore to determine the rate of blood transfusion at elective CS compared with vaginal birth in a large Australian maternity hospital. A retrospective cohort study was performed using routinely collected de-identified data of 35 477 women, over 4 years, who delivered at the Mater Mothers’ Hospital, Brisbane, Australia. After excluding women with established risk factors for transfusion, the likelihood of blood transfusion following elective CS was significantly lower compared to vaginal birth (aOR 0.47 (0.29, 0.77)).