The Impact of Physiologic And Non-Physiologic Delivery on the Mother and Neonate Outcomes; A Comparative Study on the Primi Gravid Mothers
,
Abstract
Objective:To compare the effect of the physiologic and facilitated labor on the mother and neonate outcomes in the prim gravid women referring to Arash Hospital.
Materials and methods:This clinical trial study was performed on 200 low risk pregnant women referring to Arash Women's Hospital in 2012-2013. Mothers were divided into two groups of 100 patients using a simple random sampling method. The first group received the on-pregnancy and physiologic labor training and the second group was nominated for facilitated labor without training. The mother and neonate outcomes in these two delivery methods were then compared.
Results:The rate of cesarean section in the physiologic group was significantly lower compared with the intervention group (p = 0.001). Also in the first stage of labor, VAS was measured to be noticeably lower in the physiologic group in comparison with the intervention group (p = 0.001), while the difference of VAS between the two studied groups was found not to be significant in the second stage of labor. In terms of duration of the labor and neonatal Apgar score two groups were not considerably different (p > 0.05). Moreover, the laceration rate in the physiologic group was determined to be noticeably higher as compared to the intervention group (p = 0.001). The groups were considerably different in terms of the vaginal bleeding and maternal satisfaction (p = 0.001).
Conclusion: This study revealed the lower rate of cesarean section, abnormal vaginal bleeding and pain score in the physiologic group compared with the facilitated group. Moreover, mothers of the first group were more content with the labor process.
Cunningham FG, Leveno KJ, Bloom SL, Hauth JC, Rouse DJ, Spong CY. Williams obstetrics. 23rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2010.
Fahami F, MasoufarS. Davazdahemami Sh. [The effect of Lamaze practices on the outcome of pregnancy and labour in primipara women] [Article in Persian]. Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res 2007; 12: 111-4.
Gibbs, Ronald S. Complications of Labor. In: Danforth's Obstetrics and Gynecology, 10th Edition. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2008: 447-9.
Odent M. New reasons and new ways to study birth physiology. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2001; 75: S39-45.
World Health Organization. The WHO Reproductive Health Library No. 7 Geneva: 2004.
Declercq ER, Sakala C, Corry MP, Applebaum S. Executive Summary. In: Listening to Mothers II: Report of the Second National U.S. Survey of Women’s Childbearing Experiences. New York: Childbirth Connection, 2006: 1-9.
Stubbs TM.Oxytocin for labor induction. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2000; 43: 489-94.
Romano AM, Lothian JA. Promoting, protecting, and supporting normal birth: a look at the evidence. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 2008; 37: 94-104.
WHO recommendations for the prevention of postpartum haemorrhage. Geneva: 2007.
Albers LL, Sedler KD, Bedrick EJ, Teaf D, Peralta P. Midwifery care in the second stage of labor and reduction of genital tract trauma at birth: a randomized trial. J Midwifery Womens Health 2005; 50: 365-72.
Sehhati F, Naghizadeh S, Gojazadeh M. Comparison of Maternal Outcomes in Women Admitted In Latent and Active Phases of Labor. Iranian Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Infertility 2013; 16: 18-28.
Safe Motherhood Initiative. Priorities for Safe Motherhood; 2000. Available from: http://www.safemotherhood.org/smpriorities/index.html 13.Sadler LC, Davison T, McCowan LM. A randomised controlled trial and meta-analysis of active management of labour. BJOG 2000; 107: 909-15.
Azar Kish F, Rodbari M, Sarani H, Atash Pange Z, Mirbiochezi F, Brahoti F. Effects of ambulation during the active phase of first stage of labor on the type of delivery. (Article in Persian) Journal of Ilam University of Medical Sciences 2008; 15: 48-54.
Fenton JJ, Baumeister LM, Fogarty J. Active management of the third stage of labor among American Indian women. Fam Med 2005; 37: 410-4.
de Souza Caroci da Costa A, Gonzalez Riesco ML. A comparison of "hands off" versus "hands on" techniques for decreasing perineal lacerations during birth. J Midwifery Womens Health 2006; 51: 106-11.
Christiaens W, Bracke P. Place of birth and satisfaction with childbirth in Belgium and the Netherlands. Midwifery 2009; 25: e11-9.
Liston FA, Allen VM, O'Connell CM, Jangaard KA. Neonatal outcomes with caesarean delivery at term. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2008; 93: F176-82.
| Files | ||
| Issue | Vol 9, No 1 (March 2015) | |
| Section | Original Articles | |
| Keywords | ||
| Physiologic labor facilitated labor mother outcomes neonate outcomes | ||
| Rights and permissions | |
|
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
