Search

Background Induction of labor, an increasingly common intervention, is often preceded by the application of an agent to 'prime' or 'ripen' the cervix. We conducted a randomized controlled trial to compare clinical, economic, and psychosocial outcomes of inpatient and outpatient cervical priming before induction of labor. In this paper we present the psychosocial outcomes. Methods Women participating in a randomized controlled trial in two Australian metropolitan teaching hospitals completed questionnaires to measure anxiety and depression at enrollment, and to examine satisfaction, experiences, depression, and infant feeding 7 weeks after giving birth. Data analysis was by intention to treat and by having received the intervention as intended (approximately 50% in each group). Results Of 1,004 eligible women, 85 percent consented ( n = 407, outpatient; n = 414 inpatient). No statistically significant or clinically relevant differences were found in immediate anxiety, depression, or infant feeding. Small, statistically significant differences favoring outpatient priming were found in seven of the nine subscales in the 7-week postpartum questionnaire. The direction of the effect was maintained, mostly with a larger effect size in women who received the intervention. Conclusion Women allocated to outpatient priming were more satisfied with their priming experience than women allocated to inpatient priming. Being informed that they could go home after cervical priming did not increase women's anxiety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The steadily increasing global rates of cesarean section has become one of the most debated topics in maternity care. This paper reviews and reports on the success of strategies that have been developed in response to this continuing challenge. Methods: A literature search identified studies conducted between 1985 and 2001 from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Medline, Sociofile, Current Contents, Psyclit, Cinahl, and EconLit databases. An additional search of electronic databases for Level 1 evidence (systematic reviews), Level 2 (randomized controlled trials), Level 3 (quasi-experimental studies), or Level 4 (observational studies) was performed. Selection criteria used to identify studies for review included types of study participant, intervention, outcome measure, and study. Results: Interventions that have been used in an attempt to reduce cesarean section rates were identified; they are categorized as psychosocial, clinical, and structural strategies. Two clinical interventions, (external cephalic version, vaginal birth after a previous cesarean) and one psychosocial intervention (one-to-one trained support during labor) demonstrated Level 1 evidence for reducing cesarean section rates. Conclusions: Although the evidence for one-to-one care and external cephalic version came from both developed and developing settings, the systematic review for vaginal birth after a cesarean was restricted to studies conducted in the United States. The effective implementation of the preceding strategies to reduce cesarean rates may depend on the social and cultural milieu and on associated beliefs and practices. (BIRTH 29: 1 March 2002). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Current forms of analgesia often have significant side effects for women in labor. Bathing in warm water during labor has been reported to increase a woman's comfort level and cause a reduction in painful contractions. The objective of this trial was to compare immersion in warm water during labor with traditional pain management for a range of clinical and psychological outcomes. Methods: A prospective randomized controlled trial of 274 pregnant women, who were free from medical and obstetric complications and expecting a singleton pregnancy at term, was conducted at the Women's and Children's Hospital, a maternity tertiary referral center in Adelaide, South Australia. Women in labor were randomized to an experimental group who received immersion in a bath or to a nonbath group who received routine care. Pharmacological pain relief was the primary outcome that was measured, and secondary outcomes included maternal and neonatal clinical outcomes, factors relating to maternal and neonatal infectious morbidity, psychological outcomes, and satisfaction with care. Results: The use of pharmacological analgesia was similar for both the experimental and control groups; 85 and 77 percent, respectively, used major analgesia. No statistical differences were observed in the proportion of women requiring induction and augmentation of labor or in rates of perineal trauma, length of labor, mode of delivery, or frequency of cardiotocographic trace abnormalities. Neonatal outcomes (birthweight, Apgar score, nursery care, meconium-stained liquor, cord pH estimations) revealed no statistically significant differences. Infants of bath group women required significantly more resuscitation than routine group women. Routine group women rated their overall experience of childbirth more positively than bath group women. Psychological outcomes, such as satisfaction with care or postnatal distress, were the same for both groups. Conclusion: Bathing in labor confers no clear benefits for the laboring woman but may contribute to adverse effects in the neonate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Methods Results Conclusions In an Australian randomized controlled trial (RCT), two techniques for intrapartum fetal surveillance were compared: ST analysis (STan) as an adjunct to cardiotocography (CTG), compared with CTG alone. The aim was to determine whether CTG + STan could reduce emergency cesarean birth rates while maintaining or improving neonatal outcomes. Secondary aims were to compare clinical, economic, and psychosocial outcomes. The purpose of this paper was to present psychosocial outcomes from one cohort enrolled in the trial.The study was conducted at one tertiary referral hospital. Participants who had taken part in the trial from the outset were invited to complete a questionnaire between March 2018 and January 2020, approximately 8 weeks after giving birth. Outcomes included depression, psychological distress, health‐related quality of life, and infant feeding practices. Analysis was by intention to treat.N = 207/527 participants completed the questionnaire (n = 113, STan; n = 94, CTG alone). Overall, no statistically significant or clinically meaningful differences were found in the two groups for symptoms of depression, psychological distress, quality of life, or infant feeding. A statistically significant difference was observed for the subscale of pain‐discomfort, where scores were higher on average in the CTG alone arm relative to that in the CTG + STan arm.Although STan as an adjunct to CTG constitutes a different clinical technology from CTG alone, both monitoring types appeared to produce similar results in terms of postnatal psychosocial outcomes for women. Findings from this study provide service users and staff with a comprehensive assessment of STan that can be used to make evidence‐informed decisions about monitoring options should STan become more widely available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Comments on critiques on the author's article about the feasibility and safety of water immersion during labor published in the periodical 'Birth.' Questions raised on the accuracy of sample size calculations based on the primary outcome of interest; Importance of measuring psychosocial outcomes.