This retrospective study compared 3,807 patients using Triton for both cesarean and vaginal deliveries with 3,811 historical control patients at an academic center. Triton was fully incorporated into existing practices and PPH protocols and used both during delivery and postpartum. There was a lower median and wider range of blood loss with Triton (vaginal 258 mL [151–384] vs 300 mL [300–350]; cesarean 702 mL [501–857] vs 800 ml [800–900], P<0.001 for both) and hemorrhage recognition (blood loss > 1 L) increased using Triton (vaginal 2.2% vs 0.5%; cesarean 12.6% vs 6.4%, P<0.001 for both). For vaginal delivery the proportion of transfusions on the postpartum ward decreased (47% vs 71%, P=0.046) although the transfusion rate and dose did not change. This suggests that accurate recognition of blood loss led to earlier but not more transfusion. For cesarean delivery there was a significant decrease in the transfusion dose with Triton (P=0.043) and secondary uterotonic use was greater with Triton (vaginal 22% vs 17.3%, 22%, P<0.001; cesarean 7.0% vs 6.0%, P=0.177). A cost analysis demonstrated a 152% ROI for Triton.