Is in-patient management of diastolic blood pressure between 90 and 100 mm Hg during pregnancy necessary? A randomized controlled trial of complete bed rest versus ambulation in the management of proteinuric hypertension during pregnancy. Does admission to hospital for bed rest prevent disease progression or improve fetal outcome in pregnancy complicated by non-proteinuric hypertension?
A randomised controlled trial was performed at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital to compare the effects and acceptance of routine in-patient versus out-patient management of diastolic blood pressure between 90 and 100 mm Hg in pregnant women. There were no significant differences in the establishment of the diagnosis of hypertension, development of severe hypertension or proteinuric hypertension, the number of women requiring obstetric interventions, or the neonatal outcome between the two groups. Antenatal hospital stay for the in-patient group, however, was more than twice as long as for the out-patient group (difference in mean stay, 3.7 days; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-6.2). The number of hospitalisations in the in-patient group was almost four times greater than that in the out-patient group (difference in mean number of hospitalisations, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-2.2). The two groups did not differ in their levels of satisfaction of the overall management of blood pressure. Nevertheless, a greater proportion of women preferred to choose the same type of care among the out-patient group than among the in-patient group if they had hypertension in a future pregnancy (83.7% versus 51.2%; P<0.001). More women were dissatisfied about the number of admissions than on the frequency of out-patient care (40.5% versus 16.3%; P<0.001). We conclude that in-patient care, day care, or home monitoring should be individualised. Forty patients participated in a randomized controlled trial of complete bed rest versus ambulation as desired in the management of proteinuric hypertension during pregnancy. Daily increases in serum human placental lactogen and oestriol concentrations were greater in the rested group. An especially 'at risk' group of 10 patients with both hyperuricaemia and severe fetal growth retardation was identified. Strict confinement to bed in these cases seemed to encourage the development of the premonitory symptoms of eclampsia, but was associated with a better prognosis for the fetus. To test whether a policy of admission to hospital for rest is of value in the management of women with non-proteinuric hypertension during pregnancy.
                A randomized controlled trial.
                Harare Maternity Hospital, Zimbabwe.
                218 (28 first pregnancies) women with non-proteinuric hypertension and a singleton pregnancy at between 28 and 38 weeks gestation allocated to rest in hospital or routine outpatient care.
                Admission to hospital for rest. Encouraged to rest in bed although voluntary ambulation around the ward was allowed. The women in the control group were encouraged to continue normal activity at home, to check urine each day for proteinuria. All the women were reviewed weekly.
                Disease progression was assessed by the development of severe hypertension (greater than or equal to 160/110 mmHg), development of proteinuria, need for induction of labour and number of infants born preterm (less than 37 weeks). Fetal outcome was assessed by birthweight, number of infants small-for-gestational age (SGA), and the number of infants requiring admission to the neonatal unit and their length of stay.
                The hospital rest group had a decreased risk of developing severe hypertension (blood pressure greater than or equal to 160/110 mmHg [odds ratio 0.47, 95% CI 0.26-0.83]). No differences were found in fetal growth or neonatal morbidity. The mean antenatal stay in hospital was 22.2 (SD 16.5), and 6.5 (SD 7.9) days in the rest and control groups, respectively.
                Hospital admission for bed rest decreased the risk of developing severe hypertension but no improvement in fetal growth or neonatal morbidity was observed. Fetal monitoring at home and continued outpatient antenatal care provided a safe, alternative policy to hospital admission.
Few randomised trials have evaluated rest for women with hypertension during pregnancy, and important information on side-effects and cost implication is missing from available trials. Although one small trial suggests that some bed rest may be associated with reduced risk of severe hypertension and preterm birth, these findings need to be confirmed in larger trials. At present, there is insufficient evidence to provide clear guidance for clinical practice. Therefore, bed rest should not be recommended routinely for hypertension in pregnancy, especially since more women appear to prefer unrestricted activity, if the choice were given.