Skip to main content
. 2020 Feb 13;6:23. doi: 10.1186/s40814-020-0561-z

Table 2.

Compliance with allocated trial intervention

Control (n = 107) Intervention (n = 109)
Trial blood sample taken 107 (100%) 109 (100%)
Blood sample analysed at site
 Yes 0 (–) 109 (100%)
 No 107 (100%) 0 (–)
sFlt-1/PlGF ratio obtained by site and revealed to participant 109 (100%)
Test result (sFlt-1/PlGF ratio)
 Mean (SD) 21.1 (23.9)
 Median (25th, 75th centile) 14.8 (5.3, 27.8)
 Min, max 0.6, 151.1
Expedited delivery offered sFlt-1/PlGF ratio < 38 (n = 93) sFlt-1/PlGF ratio ≥ 38 (n = 16)
 Yes 9 (8%) 81 (9%) 15 (94%)
 No 98 (92%) 85 (91%) 12 (6%)
Expedited delivery accepted
 Yes 9 (100%) 8 (100%) 12 (80%)
 No 0 (–) 0 (–) 33 (20%)

All data are N (%) unless indicated

1Reasons for offering expedited delivery in the intervention arm with sFlt-1/PlGF ratio < 38 include the following: participant wanted induction of labour even though not indicated (n = 2), clinician decision to deliver baby (n = 5) and participant offered induction for recurrent RFM (n = 1)

2Reasons for not offering expedited delivery in the intervention arm with sFlt-1/PlGF ≥ 38 include the following: clinician decision to continue pregnancy (n = 1)

3Reasons for not accepting expedited delivery in the intervention arm with sFlt-1/PlGF ≥ 38 include the following: would like delivery on midwife-led unit, feels well and baby at the time was moving well (n = 1); discussed results with husband and decided not to accept expedited delivery (n = 1); induction date booked in 1 weeks’ time, would like to stay with that plan (n = 1)