Implementation of Robert's Coping with Labor Algorithm© in a large tertiary care facility

[Pain assessment during birth : Which assessment tools comprehensibly depict the labor pains during physiological birth?]

BACKGROUND

Labor pain is a complex phenomenon, which is influenced by many factors. Therefore, an effective pain management during birth requires an assessment of the labor pains; however, there is currently no standardized and valid tool to assess labor pains.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this article is to demonstrate which assessment instruments are available for labor pains during a physiological birth and how comprehensibly they depict the pain.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study is an integrative review of the literature based on a literature search conducted in the electronic databases PubMed and CINAHL. To ensure the quality of the review article, COSMIN, AMSTAR 2 and the instrument for assessment of qualitative research of the Association of Women's Health, Obstetric and Neonatal Nurses (AWHONN) were used as assessment instruments.

RESULTS

Taking the various inclusion and exclusion criteria into consideration, five studies could be included. The following assessment instruments were identified: visual analog scale (VAS), the acceptance symptom assessment scale (ASAS), the angle labor pain questionnaire (A-LPQ), the rating scale of pain expression during childbirth (Escala de Valoración de la Expresión del Dolor durante el Trabajo de Parto, ESVADPA) and the coping with labor pain algorithm (CWLA). These were supplemented by a study on the perspectives of women.

CONCLUSION

None of the assessment instruments found could assess the birth pain in its full complexity. Therefore, midwives have to rely on their competence to evaluate labor pain on an individual basis. Further research is necessary to identify the relevant influencing factors of labor pains and to be able to develop suitable instruments.

Pain Intensity, coping and maternal satisfaction in Low-Risk labouring Women: A prospective descriptive correlational study

OBJECTIVES

The primary aim of the study was to explore pain intensity (PI) and pain coping (PC) scores and the relationship between them. The secondary aim was to explore the correlation between PI and PC scores with labour progress, parity, labour acceleration, labour augmentation and maternal satisfaction.

METHODS

A prospective descriptive correlational study was conducted in a maternity hospital in Northern Italy. The sample included 54 low-risk women in active labour at term of pregnancy. A data record sheet was used to collect the relevant variables and the Italian Birth Satisfaction Scale Revised (I-BSS-R) was administered to participants at least 24 h after birth.

RESULTS

In the first labour stage, the average PI score was 6.99 (SD = 1.95) and the average PC score was 6.5 (SD = 2.22). During the second labour stage, the average PI score was 7.75 (SD = 1.74) and the average PC score was 4.97 (SD = 2.76). The average PI score trend increased with labour progress. The average PC score improved between 4 and 7 cm of cervical dilatation. A significant positive correlation between PI scores and oxytocin augmentation (p < 0.001) and labour progression (p < 0.001) was noted. A significant positive correlation between PC scores and oxytocin augmentation (p = 0.02) was also observed. No significant differences were found for maternal satisfaction in regard to PI and PC scores.

CONCLUSION

coping in labour do not solely depend on PI but also on labour progress and oxytocin augmentation. Additional support to empower women to cope with pain may be required in case of labour augmentation.

Effect of Midwife-Provided Orientation of Birth Companions on Maternal Anxiety and Coping during Labor: A Stepped Wedge Cluster Randomized Control Trial in Eastern Uganda

The study aimed to assess the effect of midwife-provided orientation of birth companions on maternal anxiety and coping during labor. A stepped wedge cluster randomized trial design was conducted among 475 participants (control n = 240), intervention n = 235) from four clusters. Midwives in the intervention period provided an orientation session for the birth companions on supportive labor techniques. Coping was assessed throughout labor and anxiety scores were measured after birth. Independent t-test and Chi-Square tests were used to assess the differences by study period. Anxiety scores were reduced among women in the intervention period (p = 0.001). The proportion of women able to cope during early active labor was higher during the intervention period (p = 0.031). Women in the intervention period had 80% higher odds of coping (p = 0.032) compared to those in the control period. Notable differences in anxiety and coping with labor were observed among first-time mothers, younger women, and when siblings provided support. Midwife-provided orientation of birth companions on labor support lowers maternal anxiety and improves coping during labor. Findings could inform the planning and development of policies for the implementation of the presence of birth companions in similar low-resource settings.

The Effect of Holistic Birth Support Strategies on Coping With Labor Pain, Birth Satisfaction, and Fear of Childbirth: A Randomized, Triple-Blind, Controlled Trial

The current study was aimed to evaluate the effects of interventions conducted in line with the coping with labor pain algorithm (holistic birth support strategies) on women's coping with labor pain, birth satisfaction, and fear of childbirth. The study is a single-center, parallel-group randomized, three-blind, controlled trial. The study was completed with 33 women in the experimental group and 31 in the control group. The mean score of the women in the experimental group from the Birth Satisfaction Scale (128.57 ± 5.83) was statistically significantly higher than that of the women in the control group (81.80 ± 7.73). The mean score of the women in the experimental group (61.96 ± 9.78) from the Wijma Birth Expectation/Experience Scale, Version B scale was statistically significantly lower than that of the women in the control group (148.64 ± 14.62). It was found that the women in the experimental group were able to better cope with labor pain, had higher birth satisfaction, and had less fear of childbirth.

Women's experiences of pharmacological and non-pharmacological pain relief methods for labour and childbirth: a qualitative systematic review

BACKGROUND

Many women use pharmacological or non-pharmacological pain relief during childbirth. Evidence from Cochrane reviews shows that effective pain relief is not always associated with high maternal satisfaction scores. However, understanding women's views is important for good quality maternity care provision. We undertook a qualitative evidence synthesis of women's views and experiences of pharmacological (epidural, opioid analgesia) and non-pharmacological (relaxation, massage techniques) pain relief options, to understand what affects women's decisions and choices and to inform guidelines, policy, and practice.

METHODS

We searched seven electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, AMED, EMBASE, Global Index Medicus, AJOL), tracked citations and checked references. We used thematic and meta-ethnographic techniques for analysis purposes, and GRADE-CERQual tool to assess confidence in review findings. We developed review findings for each method. We then re-analysed the review findings thematically to highlight similarities and differences in women's accounts of different pain relief methods.

RESULTS

From 11,782 hits, we screened full 58 papers. Twenty-four studies provided findings for the synthesis: epidural (n = 12), opioids (n = 3), relaxation (n = 8) and massage (n = 4) - all conducted in upper-middle and high-income countries (HMICs). Re-analysis of the review findings produced five key themes. 'Desires for pain relief' illuminates different reasons for using pharmacological or non-pharmacological pain relief. 'Impact on pain' describes varying levels of effectiveness of the methods used. 'Influence and experience of support' highlights women's positive or negative experiences of support from professionals and/or birth companions. 'Influence on focus and capabilities' illustrates that all pain relief methods can facilitate maternal control, but some found non-pharmacological techniques less effective than anticipated, and others reported complications associated with medication use. Finally, 'impact on wellbeing and health' reports that whilst some women were satisfied with their pain relief method, medication was associated with negative self-reprisals, whereas women taught relaxation techniques often continued to use these methods with beneficial outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Women report mixed experiences of different pain relief methods. Pharmacological methods can reduce pain but have negative side-effects. Non-pharmacological methods may not reduce labour pain but can facilitate bonding with professionals and birth supporters. Women need information on risks and benefits of all available pain relief methods.

Barriers and facilitators to birth without epidural in a tertiary obstetric referral center: Perspectives of health care professionals and patients

BACKGROUND

Epidural rates are high in tertiary obstetric referral centers, even though many patients in tertiary settings might not want or need epidural analgesia. Epidural rates are influenced by factors including labor support and routine medical intervention. This study aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to birth without epidural in a Canadian tertiary center, from the perspectives of doctors, nurses, and patients.

METHODS

In this qualitative exploratory study, individual, semi-structured interviews were conducted in 2016 with 5 doctors, 5 nurses, and 4 patients who intended to birth without epidural. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using inductive qualitative thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Several contextual factors in the tertiary center facilitated or were barriers to birth without epidural. The following themes emerged: (1) differing perceptions of pain, (2) being ready for things to go wrong, (3) labor support is more labor intensive, and (4) having insufficient resources for birth without epidural.

CONCLUSIONS

Reconciling patient birth goals with staff focus on patient safety is challenging in the tertiary context. Discrepancies between health care professional and patient attitudes about childbirth pain may influence decision-making about epidural use. Maintaining labor support skills is challenging for health care professionals who have limited exposure to birth without epidural. There is a need to allocate dedicated resources to better support birth without epidural. Specifically, support could be improved through the implementation of guidelines for assessment and management of labor pain, provision of a variety of pain management options, and labor support training for health care professionals.