Journal of obstetric, gynecologic, and neonatal nursing : JOGNN · 2005
Provider support of spontaneous pushing during the second stage of labor.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sampselle Carolyn M, Miller Janis M, Luecha Yuwadee, Fischer Kathryn, Rosten Lisabeth
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To describe the association between provider communication and actual maternal pushing behavior in second-stage labor and to test differences in length of second stage and total maternal pushing time by maternal pushing behavior.
DESIGN: Descriptive.
SETTING: Midwest hospital birth unit.
PARTICIPANTS: Twenty primigravidas who gave birth vaginally.
INTERVENTION: Type of provider communication (supportive of spontaneous or directed pushing).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Maternal pushing behavior (spontaneous or directed) documented by videotape review.
RESULTS: The percentage of provider communication supporting spontaneous pushing versus directed pushing and the percentage of actual spontaneous versus directed maternal pushing behavior were associated (Pearson r = .80, p = .001, for spontaneous and r = .89, p = .001, for directed). Neither duration of second stage (t = .06, p = .95) nor time spent pushing (t = .15, p = .89) differed by spontaneous versus directed pushing style.
CONCLUSION: The proportion of spontaneous pushing by the birthing woman was positively and significantly associated with the proportion of caregiver communication supporting and encouraging spontaneous pushing. Importantly, spontaneous pushing did not significantly lengthen the duration of second-stage labor or total time spent pushing.
DESIGN: Descriptive.
SETTING: Midwest hospital birth unit.
PARTICIPANTS: Twenty primigravidas who gave birth vaginally.
INTERVENTION: Type of provider communication (supportive of spontaneous or directed pushing).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Maternal pushing behavior (spontaneous or directed) documented by videotape review.
RESULTS: The percentage of provider communication supporting spontaneous pushing versus directed pushing and the percentage of actual spontaneous versus directed maternal pushing behavior were associated (Pearson r = .80, p = .001, for spontaneous and r = .89, p = .001, for directed). Neither duration of second stage (t = .06, p = .95) nor time spent pushing (t = .15, p = .89) differed by spontaneous versus directed pushing style.
CONCLUSION: The proportion of spontaneous pushing by the birthing woman was positively and significantly associated with the proportion of caregiver communication supporting and encouraging spontaneous pushing. Importantly, spontaneous pushing did not significantly lengthen the duration of second-stage labor or total time spent pushing.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdultClinical Nursing ResearchCommunicationDelivery, ObstetricFemaleGestational AgeHospitals, MaternityHumansLabor Stage, SecondMaternal AgeMidwiferyNatural ChildbirthNeonatal NursingNurse-Patient RelationsObserver VariationParityPhysician-Patient RelationsPregnancyPregnancy OutcomePressureRisk FactorsUterine ContractionVideo Recording