The relationship of ambulation in labor to operative delivery

Harnessing technology to enable all women mobility in labour and birth: feasibility of implementing beltless non-invasive fetal ECG applying the NASSS framework

BACKGROUND

A new wireless and beltless monitoring device utilising fetal and maternal electrocardiography (ECG) and uterine electromyography, known as 'non-invasive fetal ECG' (NIFECG) was registered for clinical use in Australia in 2018. The safety and reliability of NIFECG has been demonstrated in controlled settings for short periods during labour. As far as we are aware, at the time our study commenced, this was globally the first trial of such a device in an authentic clinical setting for the entire duration of a woman's labour.

METHODS

This study aimed to assess the feasibility of using NIFECG fetal monitoring for women undergoing continuous electronic fetal monitoring during labour and birth. Women were eligible to participate in the study if they were at 36 weeks gestation or greater with a singleton pregnancy, planning to give birth vaginally and with obstetric indications as per local protocol (NSW Health Fetal Heart Rate Monitoring Guideline GL2018_025. 2018) for continuous intrapartum fetal monitoring. Written informed consent was received from participating women in antenatal clinic prior to the onset of labour. This single site clinical feasibility study took place between January and July 2020 at the Royal Hospital for Women in Sydney, Australia. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected to inform the analysis of results using the NASSS (Non-adoption, Abandonment, Scale up, Spread and Sustainability) framework, a validated tool for analysing the implementation of new health technologies into clinical settings.

RESULTS

Women responded positively about the comfort and freedom of movement afforded by the NIFECG. Midwives reported that when no loss of contact occurred, the device enabled them to focus less on the technology and more on supporting women's physical and emotional needs during labour. Midwives and obstetricians noticed the benefits for women but expressed a need for greater certainty about the reliability of the signal.

CONCLUSION

The NIFECG device enables freedom of movement and positioning for labouring women and was well received by women and the majority of clinicians. Whilst measurement of the uterine activity was reliable, there was uncertainty for clinicians in relation to loss of contact of the fetal heart rate. If this can be ameliorated the device shows potential to be used as routinely as cardiotocography (CTG) for fetal monitoring. This is the first time the NASSS framework has been used to synthesise the implementation needs of a health technology in the care of women during labour and birth. Our findings contribute new knowledge about the determinants for implementation of a complex technology in a maternity care setting.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The Universal Trial Number is reU1111-1228-9845 and the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registration Number is 12619000293167p. Trial registration occurred on the 20 February, 2019. The trial protocol may be viewed at http://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=377027.

The use of continuous foetal monitoring technologies that enable mobility in labour for women with complex pregnancies: A survey of Australian and New Zealand hospitals

OBJECTIVE

Freedom of movement and choice of positioning in labour and birth is known to enhance physiological processes and positive experiences for women during childbirth. Continuous foetal monitoring technologies that enable mobility in labour for women with complex pregnancies, such as wireless CTG, have been marketed for clinical use in most high resource settings since 2003 but there is a paucity of midwifery literature about its clinical use. The aim of this survey was to determine how often, and for whom, wireless and beltless technologies are being used in maternity settings across Australia and New Zealand and to identify any barriers to their uptake.

DESIGN

A survey tool developed by Watson et al. (2018) for use in the United Kingdom was adapted for the Australian/New Zealand context. One Maternity Unit Manager or key midwifery clinician from each of 208 public and private hospitals across Australia and New Zealand was invited by email to participate in an online survey between October 2019 and January 2020. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the characteristics of the facilities and the frequency of availability of the monitors. Free text responses were thematically analysed.

FINDINGS

The survey received a high (71%) response rate from a range of public and private hospitals in urban and rural settings. Women's freedom of movement and sense of choice and control in labour were seen by most respondents to be positively influenced by wireless monitoring technology. Most facilities reported having at least one wireless or beltless foetal monitor available, however, results suggest that many women consenting to continuous monitoring still do not have access to technology that enables freedom of movement.

KEYCONCLUSIONS

Further research is required to explore the barriers and facilitators to enabling freedom of movement and positioning to all women in childbirth, including those women with complex pregnancies who may consent to continuous foetal monitoring.

Wearable Fetal Monitoring Solution for Improved Mobility During Labor & Delivery

Electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) is used widely during labor & delivery, but existing solutions limit patient mobility, are uncomfortable, and do not consistently capture fetal heart rate (FHR) and uterine activity (UA) signals. A wireless EFM system was developed that features wearable US and tocodynamometer devices that conform to the body and do not require cables or belts. Benchtop testing demonstrated that the devices can accurately and consistently measure simulated FHRs and UAs over clinically meaningful ranges and body curvatures. The wearable EFM devices are expected to provide more reliable signal capture independent of maternal movement and repositioning, while also significantly improving patient comfort and mobility.

Comparison of the effects of maternal supportive care and acupressure (BL32 acupoint) on pregnant women's pain intensity and delivery outcome

Delivery is considered as one of the most painful experiences of women's life. The present study aimed to compare the effects of supportive care and acupressure on the pregnant women's pain intensity and delivery outcome. In this experimental study, 150 pregnant women were randomly divided into supportive care, acupressure, and control groups. The intensity of pain was measured using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). The supportive care group received both physical and emotional cares. In the acupressure group, on the other hand, BL32 acupoint was pressed during the contractions. Then, the data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. The results revealed significant difference among the three groups regarding the intensity of pain after the intervention (P < 0.001). Besides, the highest rate of natural vaginal delivery was observed in the supportive care group (94%) and the acupressure group (92%), while the highest rate of cesarean delivery was related to the control group (40%) and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.001). The results showed that maternal supportive care and acupressure during labor reduced the intensity of pain and improved the delivery outcomes. Therefore, these methods can be introduced to the medical team as effective strategies for decreasing delivery pain. This trial is registered with the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trial Code IRCT2014011011706N5.

Maternal positions and mobility during first stage labour

BACKGROUND

It is more common for women in both high- and low-income countries giving birth in health facilities, to labour in bed. There is no evidence that this is associated with any advantage for women or babies, although it may be more convenient for staff. Observational studies have suggested that if women lie on their backs during labour this may have adverse effects on uterine contractions and impede progress in labour, and in some women reduce placental blood flow.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of encouraging women to assume different upright positions (including walking, sitting, standing and kneeling) versus recumbent positions (supine, semi-recumbent and lateral) for women in the first stage of labour on duration of labour, type of birth and other important outcomes for mothers and babies.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 January 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing women randomised to upright versus recumbent positions in the first stage of labour.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used methods described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions for carrying out data collection, assessing study quality and analysing results. Two review authors independently evaluated methodological quality and extracted data for each study. We sought additional information from trial authors as required. We used random-effects analysis for comparisons in which high heterogeneity was present. We reported results using the average risk ratio (RR) for categorical data and mean difference (MD) for continuous data.

MAIN RESULTS

Results should be interpreted with caution as the methodological quality of the 25 included trials (5218 women) was variable.For Comparison 1: Upright and ambulant positions versus recumbent positions and bed care, the first stage of labour was approximately one hour and 22 minutes shorter for women randomised to upright as opposed to recumbent positions (average MD -1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.22 to -0.51; 15 studies, 2503 women; random-effects, T(2) = 2.39, Chi(2) = 203.55, df = 14, (P < 0.00001), I(2) = 93%). Women who were upright were also less likely to have caesarean section (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.94; 14 studies, 2682 women) and less likely to have an epidural (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.99, nine studies, 2107 women; random-effects, T(2) = 0.02, I(2) = 61%). Babies of mothers who were upright were less likely to be admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit, however this was based on one trial (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.89, one study, 200 women). There were no significant differences between groups for other outcomes including duration of the second stage of labour, or other outcomes related to the well being of mothers and babies.For Comparison 2: Upright and ambulant positions versus recumbent positions and bed care (with epidural: all women), there were no significant differences between groups for outcomes including duration of the second stage of labour, or other outcomes related to the well being of mothers and babies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is clear and important evidence that walking and upright positions in the first stage of labour reduces the duration of labour, the risk of caesarean birth, the need for epidural, and does not seem to be associated with increased intervention or negative effects on mothers' and babies' well being. Given the great heterogeneity and high performance bias of study situations, better quality trials are still required to confirm with any confidence the true risks and benefits of upright and mobile positions compared with recumbent positions for all women. Based on the current findings, we recommend that women in low-risk labour should be informed of the benefits of upright positions, and encouraged and assisted to assume whatever positions they choose.

Maternal positions and mobility during first stage labour

BACKGROUND

It is more common for women in both high- and low-income countries giving birth in health facilities, to labour in bed. There is no evidence that this is associated with any advantage for women or babies, although it may be more convenient for staff. Observational studies have suggested that if women lie on their backs during labour this may have adverse effects on uterine contractions and impede progress in labour, and in some women reduce placental blood flow.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of encouraging women to assume different upright positions (including walking, sitting, standing and kneeling) versus recumbent positions (supine, semi-recumbent and lateral) for women in the first stage of labour on duration of labour, type of birth and other important outcomes for mothers and babies.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 January 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing women randomised to upright versus recumbent positions in the first stage of labour.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used methods described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions for carrying out data collection, assessing study quality and analysing results. Two review authors independently evaluated methodological quality and extracted data for each study. We sought additional information from trial authors as required. We used random-effects analysis for comparisons in which high heterogeneity was present. We reported results using the average risk ratio (RR) for categorical data and mean difference (MD) for continuous data.

MAIN RESULTS

Results should be interpreted with caution as the methodological quality of the 25 included trials (5218 women) was variable.For Comparison 1: Upright and recumbent positions versus recumbent positions and bed care, the first stage of labour was approximately one hour and 22 minutes shorter for women randomised to upright as opposed to recumbent positions (average MD -1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.22 to -0.51; 15 studies, 2503 women; random-effects, T(2) = 2.39, Chi(2) = 203.55, df = 14, (P < 0.00001), I(2) = 93%). Women who were upright were also less likely to have caesarean section (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.94; 14 studies, 2682 women) and less likely to have an epidural (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.99, nine studies, 2107 women; random-effects, T(2) = 0.02, I(2) = 61%). Babies of mothers who were upright were less likely to be admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit, however this was based on one trial (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.89, one study, 200 women). There were no significant differences between groups for other outcomes including duration of the second stage of labour, or other outcomes related to the well being of mothers and babies.For Comparison 2: Upright and recumbent positions versus recumbent positions and bed care (with epidural: all women), there were no significant differences between groups for outcomes including duration of the second stage of labour, or other outcomes related to the well being of mothers and babies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is clear and important evidence that walking and upright positions in the first stage of labour reduces the duration of labour, the risk of caesarean birth, the need for epidural, and does not seem to be associated with increased intervention or negative effects on mothers' and babies' well being. Given the great heterogeneity and high performance bias of study situations, better quality trials are still required to confirm with any confidence the true risks and benefits of upright and mobile positions compared with recumbent positions for all women. Based on the current findings, we recommend that women in low-risk labour should be informed of the benefits of upright positions, and encouraged and assisted to assume whatever positions they choose.

Maternal ambulation during labor

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To describe the recent advances in labor epidural analgesia, which may have an impact on maternal ambulation during labor.

RECENT FINDINGS

With the advent of new epidural adjuvant drugs and new epidural delivery systems, we are now able to use very low concentration local anesthetic solutions with a reduction in the total doses of local anesthetic administered. This allows a much greater preservation of lower limb motor function in the parturient, with a subsequent positive effect on maternal ambulation. Although it is well documented that maternal satisfaction scores are higher with ambulatory epidurals than with other more conventional epidural techniques, the other positive effects, such as shorter labor times, and a reduction in instrumental and cesarean delivery rates, thought to have been associated with ambulatory epidurals, have however been more difficult to prove.

SUMMARY

Since the earliest 'walking epidural' was described in the early 1990s, there has been much research into finding the ideal regional technique for labor analgesia that provides excellent analgesia with high maternal satisfaction scores while having little adverse effect on obstetric outcome. This review attempts to map the journey of the 'walking epidural' from its earliest form to its more recognizable modern day appearance.

Closing the Theory–Practice Gap: Intrapartum Midwifery Management of Planned Homebirths

In the United States, access to qualified homebirth providers varies by state, city, and community, and consistent, evidence-based guidelines for intrapartum management at home are not available. This article examines the similarities and differences in midwifery management of the intrapartum, postpartum, and neonatal course between planned homebirths and planned hospital births. Characteristics of qualified attendants, essential medical supplies and equipment, methods for maternal and fetal surveillance, and common intrapartum indications for transfer are discussed. Unique features of management of the healthy woman and baby in the home are described, as well as the process of consultation and/or referral for collaborative or medical management. Current evidence for the management of fetal intolerance of labor, meconium stained amniotic fluid, prolonged labor, postpartum hemorrhage, and the unstable newborn is discussed in the context of homebirth practice. Aspects of homebirth care that require cultural competency and affect the informed consent process are included. Homebirth practice may provide opportunities to increase the congruence between espoused midwifery philosophy and actual practice.

The Evidence for Physiologic Management of the Active Phase of the First Stage of Labor

The active phase of first stage labor is generally defined as the period between 3 cm to 4 cm to complete cervical dilatation, in the presence of regular uterine contractions. Most women will experience this portion of labor within hospital obstetric units, where care commonly features restriction to bed, electronic fetal monitoring, early treatment of "slow" labors, and few pain management options beyond epidurals and narcotics. However, the available evidence on appropriate care for healthy childbearing women favors activity in labor, intermittent auscultation, patience from caregivers, and nonpharmacologic methods of pain relief. This article reviews the evidence for care practices that support physiologic labor. Modifying intrapartum care to reflect current evidence will improve women's health, and will require a multilevel approach and consistent midwifery demonstration of the model.

The vertical position during labor: pain and satisfaction

OBJECTIVES: to evaluate the vertical position adopted by nulliparous women during labor in terms of pain and satisfaction with the position. METHODS: the study was based on a secondary efficacy analysis of data from 107 nulliparous women enrolled in a randomized controlled trial in which the vertical position adopted during the dilation phase of labor was evaluated. The analysis involved comparing the median percentages of the duration for which women remained in the vertical position for each of the variables studied . The Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests were used to determine the difference s betwee n th e groups. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05. RESULTS: at 4cm of dilation , the women with a pain score < 5 remained longer in the vertical position during labor compared to those with a score > 7 (p=0.02) . At 4 and 6 cm of dilation , the women who reported greater satisfaction remained more than 50 % of the time in the vertical position (p=0.0 2 an d p=0.03 , respectively). CONCLUSIONS: the vertical position helped relieve labor pain and increased comfort and patient satisfaction.

Maternal positions and mobility during first stage labour

BACKGROUND

It is more common for women in the developed world, and those in low-income countries giving birth in health facilities, to labour in bed. There is no evidence that this is associated with any advantage for women or babies, although it may be more convenient for staff. Observational studies have suggested that if women lie on their backs during labour this may have adverse effects on uterine contractions and impede progress in labour.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the review is to assess the effects of encouraging women to assume different upright positions (including walking, sitting, standing and kneeling) versus recumbent positions (supine, semi-recumbent and lateral) for women in the first stage of labour on length of labour, type of delivery and other important outcomes for mothers and babies.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (November 2008).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing women randomised to upright versus recumbent positions in the first stage of labour.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used methods described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions for carrying out data collection, assessing study quality and analysing results. A minimum of two review authors independently assessed each study.

MAIN RESULTS

The review includes 21 studies with a total of 3706 women. Overall, the first stage of labour was approximately one hour shorter for women randomised to upright as opposed to recumbent positions (MD -0.99, 95% CI -1.60 to -0.39). Women randomised to upright positions were less likely to have epidural analgesia (RR 0.83 95% CI 0.72 to 0.96).There were no differences between groups for other outcomes including length of the second stage of labour, mode of delivery, or other outcomes related to the wellbeing of mothers and babies. For women who had epidural analgesia there were no differences between those randomised to upright versus recumbent positions for any of the outcomes examined in the review. Little information on maternal satisfaction was collected, and none of the studies compared different upright or recumbent positions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that walking and upright positions in the first stage of labour reduce the length of labour and do not seem to be associated with increased intervention or negative effects on mothers' and babies' wellbeing. Women should be encouraged to take up whatever position they find most comfortable in the first stage of labour.

Observing position and movements in hydrotherapy: a pilot study

OBJECTIVE

To observe and describe the positions and movements women choose while immersed in water during the first stage of labor.

DESIGN

Descriptive, observational pilot study.

SETTING

A rural community hospital that provided hydrotherapy in labor.

PARTICIPANTS

Women (N = 7) who intended to use hydrotherapy in labor were recruited prenatally from a midwife-managed practice.

MEASURES

For 15 minutes of each hour during the first stage of labor, position and movements of the participants were observed and recorded on a laptop computer. The observational tool was developed for this study from a review of the literature and interviews with nursing experts; 435 observations were recorded. Women were free to choose when and how long to use hydrotherapy and had no restriction on their positions and movements.

RESULTS

Only 3 of the 7 participants labored in the tub. Women demonstrated a greater range of positions and movements in the tub than in bed, both throughout labor and during late first-stage labor (7-10 cm of dilatation). Women had more contractions and made more rhythmic movements while in the tub than in bed.

CONCLUSIONS

Hydrotherapy may encourage upright positions and movements that facilitate labor progress and coping, helping women avoid unnecessary interventions.

Pain during the labor active phase: the effect of walking

This study aimed to verify whether the distance walked is correlated with women's pain level throughout the active phase of labor. METHODOLOGY: We realized an analytic, quasi-experimental intervention study. Study participants were 80 primiparous parturient women, who were admitted during spontaneous labor, with 37-42 weeks, at the start of the active phase. DATA ANALYSIS: Spearman's correlation test. RESULTS: the parturient women walked an average distance of 1,624 meters, 63.09% of the active phase of labor and during an average time of five hours. Pain scores increase along with the advance in cervical dilatation. However, we only found a significant positive correlation when 5cm of dilatation had been reached, that is, the more distance the participants walked, the higher the pain scores they reached.

O efeito da deambulação na duração da faze ativa do trabalho de parto

O trabalho teve como objetivo analisar a associação entre a deambulação e a duração da fase ativa do trabalho de parto. Metodologia: estudo analítico de intervenção do tipo quase experimental. Fizeram parte do estudo 80 parturientes primíparas, admitidas em trabalho de parto espontâneo, no início da fase ativa. Instrumentos de coleta de dados: podômetro para medir a distância percorrida em metros, Escala Visual Numérica (EVN) de dor, formulário para o registro de dados. Resultados: as participantes percorreram uma distância média de 1.624 metros, 63,09% da fase ativa do trabalho de parto e em um tempo médio de 5 horas. Verificou-se que a quantidade deambulada durante as três primeiras horas da fase ativa está associada a um encurtamento do trabalho de parto, sendo que a cada 100 metros percorridos ocorreu uma diminuição de 22 minutos na primeira hora, 10 minutos na segunda hora e 6 minutos na terceira hora.

Reflexões sobre deambulação e posição materna no trabalho de parto e parto

Este artigo apresenta uma reflexão sobre os fatores determinantes que levaram à mudança da posição da mulher de vertical para horizontal no processo de parturição. A institucionalização do processo de parir e nascer promoveu uma série de mudanças no assistir à mulher e à família. Muitas das práticas que preservavam o respeito à autonomia e aos valores culturais deram lugar a outros que valorizam a tecnologia, a medicalização e a intervenção. Tais mudanças não efetivaram significativa redução na mortalidade materna e neonatal, pelo contrário, promoveram a desumanização da assistência. Um novo olhar sobre o efeito da deambulação e da posição durante o trabalho de parto e parto está sendo incentivado e está dando oportunidade de evidenciar uma série de vantagens e benefícios para mãe e filho.

Care practice #2: freedom of movement throughout labor

This updated edition of Care Practice Paper #2 presents the evidence for the benefits of allowing freedom of movement in labor. Physiologic and anatomical principles that support the benefits of movement are explained. The authors review common obstacles to movement in labor, including the routine use of interventions that inhibit women's ability to walk or change position. Women are encouraged to plan to be active in labor and to select care providers and birth settings that provide the full range of options for using movement in labor.

The influence of the birthplace and models of care on midwifery practice for the management of women in labour

This paper will examine how the settings in which midwives practice (the birthplace) and models of care affect midwives' decision making during the management of labour. One-hundred-and-four independent, team and hospital based midwives and 100 low obstetric risk nulliparous women to whom labour care was provided were surveyed. These midwives and women resided in the Auckland metropolitan area of New Zealand. The majority of midwives who participated worked in models of care which provided women with continuity of carer and care, however, this was not found to influence the way the midwives provided labour care. Instead, practice was found to be relatively homogenous regardless of whether the midwives worked in independent, team, or hospital-based practice. The birthplace setting in which the labour care took place did influence midwifery practice. The majority of midwives provided labour care in large obstetric hospitals and identified practices dominated by the medical model of care. Practice was described as being influenced by intervention and the need for technology, however, this did not prevent the majority of women from perceiving they were actively involved in the decision making process and that they worked in partnership with their midwives. Closer examination of the midwives' decision making processes whilst providing the labour care revealed that the midwives' individual decisions were influenced by the needs of the women rather than the hospital protocols. What became evident was that the midwives in this study had adopted a humanistic approach to care whereby technology was used alongside relationship-centred care.

Maternal position during the first stage of labor: a systematic review

Background

Policy makers and health professionals are progressively using evidence-based rationale to guide their decisions. There has long been controversy regarding which maternal position is more appropriate during the first stage of labor. This problem has been examined often and repeatedly and the optimal recommendation remains unclear.

Methods

This is a systematic review of the effect of maternal position during the first stage of labor. The main question addressed here is: Does encouraging women to adopt an upright position or to ambulate during the first stage of labor reduce the duration of this stage? All randomized controlled trials carried out to assess this effect were taken into consideration in this review. The following electronic databases were accessed to identify studies: MEDLINE, Popline, the Scientific Electronic Library On-line and the Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information. Citation eligibility was independently assessed by two reviewers. The methodological quality of each trial was also evaluated independently by two reviewers and a trial under consideration was included only when consensus had been attained. Allocation concealment and screening for the occurrence of attrition, performance and detection biases were considered when studies were appraised. The decision whether to perform data pooling was based on the clinical similarity of studies.

Results

The search strategy resulted in 260 citations, of which 18 were assessed in full-text. Nine eligible randomized controlled trials were included in the systematic review. Randomization methods were not fully described in eight studies. The allocation concealment was considered adequate in four studies and unclear in five. The investigators pooled the data from seven studies in which the length of the first stage of labor and results were in favor of the intervention, but the high level of heterogeneity (I² = 88.4%) impaired the meaning of this finding. The intervention did not affect other outcomes studied (mode of delivery, use of analgesia, labor augmentation and condition of the child at birth).

Conclusion

Adoption of the upright position or ambulation during first stage of labor may be safe, but considering the available evidence and its consistency, it cannot be recommended as an effective intervention to reduce duration of the first stage of labor.

Impact of walking epidural analgesia on obstetric outcome of nulliparous women in spontaneous labour

BACKGROUND

To explore the effects of walking epidural analgesia on obstetric and neonatal outcomes, we performed a case-control study.

METHOD

Each nulliparous woman receiving walking epidural analgesia using 0.0625% bupivacaine (n = 44) was matched to two nulliparous historical controls receiving 0.125% or 0.25% bupivacaine (n = 88 each) for epidural analgesia while recumbent.

RESULTS

Maternal and obstetric parameters, fetal status and presentation, and oxytocin use were comparable among groups. Those receiving walking epidural analgesia walked for a mean of 60 min (range: 20-75 min). In the control groups the mean total durations of labour were shorter (58 min in the 0.125% group and 99 min in the 0.25% group, P < 0.05). Significantly fewer walking epidural analgesia cases than controls required instrumental vaginal delivery (P < 0.05). No other differences in obstetric or fetal outcome were observed and no mother fell or stumbled while walking.

CONCLUSION

Although it was associated with a prolonged first stage of labour, walking epidural analgesia appeared safe for nulliparous women and their babies.

Prenatal risk factors for Caesarean section. Analyses of the ALSPAC cohort of 12,944 women in England

BACKGROUND

There has been an escalation in Caesarean section rates globally. Numerous prenatal factors have been associated with elective and emergency Caesarean section, some of which may be amenable to change.

METHODS

A population-based cohort of 12,944 singleton, liveborn, term pregnancies were used to investigate risk factors for Caesarean section using multivariable logistic regression modelling. Numerous prenatal factors were investigated for their associations with the following outcomes: first, with Caesarean section (both elective and emergency) compared with vaginal delivery (spontaneous and assisted); second, for their associations with elective Caesarean section compared with attempted vaginal delivery; and finally emergency Caesarean section compared with spontaneous vaginal delivery.

RESULTS

11,791 women had vaginal delivery and 1153 had Caesarean section (685 emergency, 468 elective). Non-cephalic (breech) presentation (all Caesareans odds ratio (OR) 36.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) 26.8-50.0; elective Caesarean OR 86.4, 95% CI 58.5-127.8; emergency Caesarean OR 9.58, 95% CI 6.06-15.1) and previous Caesarean section (all Caesareans OR 27.8, 95% CI 20.9-37.0, elective Caesarean OR 54.4, 95% CI 38.4-77.5; emergency Caesarean OR 13.0, 95% CI 7.76-21.7) were associated in all analyses with an increased risk of Caesarean section. Extremes of neonatal birthweight were associated with an increased risk of Caesarean section (all Caesareans and emergency section) compared with vaginal delivery as was increasing neonatal head circumferences. In all analyses increasing maternal age (OR 1.07 per year, 95 % CI 1.04-1.09; OR 1.04 per year, 95 % CI 1.01-1.08; OR 1.11 per year, 95% CI 1.08-1.15) was independently associated with increased odds of Caesarean section. Increasing parity was associated with a decrease in risk for all Caesareans and emergency section (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.53-0.75 and OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.33-0.63, respectively), as was the outcome of the last pregnancy being a live child. Increasing gestation was independently associated with a decreased risk of both all Caesareans and elective Caesarean (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.80-0.93 and OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.46-0.58 respectively), whereas diabetes mellitus was associated with increased risk. These variables were not associated with emergency section. However, epidural use was associated with an increased risk of emergency Caesarean (OR 6.49, 95% CI 4.78-8.82) while being in a preferred labour position decreased the risk (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.49-0.73).

CONCLUSIONS

A careful exploration of risk factors may allow us to identify reasons for the increasing rates of Caesarean section and the marked variation between institutions.

Ambulatory labor analgesia: what does an obstetrician need to know?

A simple statement that describes the degree of the patient's satisfaction with the pain relief from her labor epidural analgesia has often assessed the quality of labor analgesia as perceived by the patient. Many laboring parturients, midwives, obstetricians and anesthesiologists are increasingly concerned by the limitations of traditional epidural labor analgesia. In general, women dislike the inability to void, the often-dense motor block, the feeling of numbness of the lower body, the total lack of the urge to bear down, and the complete perineal anesthesia. Continuous search for balanced labor analgesia that provides relief from pain, while preserving motor function, has led to the development of an ambulatory labor analgesia technique. This article assesses the validity of various strongly advocated opinions as to whether parturients benefit from ambulation in labor and also reviews the current trends in ambulatory labor analgesia.

Intrathecal opioids for combined spinal-epidural analgesia during labour

In <25 years, intrathecal administration of opioids (i.e. spinal analgesia) has evolved from an experimental model into an important therapy for obstetric analgesia and anaesthesia. A small dose of opioid delivered into the CSF provides almost immediate relief from labour pain with minimal risks to the mother and fetus. Careful attention, and prompt treatment when needed, can ameliorate the adverse effects of fetal bradycardia, respiratory depression and pruritus. The major limitation of intrathecal opioids for labour analgesia is the short duration of effect: 90-180 minutes under ideal circumstances. To address this problem, and to increase flexibility for anaesthesia as well as analgesia, the combined spinal-epidural (CSE) technique was developed. The CSE technique involves injection of drugs into the CSF and placement of an epidural catheter. An intrathecally administered opioid provides a rapid onset of labour analgesia without motor block or significant haemodynamic perturbation. The epidural catheter allows ongoing administration of medications to maintain labour analgesia and provides a means of delivering anaesthesia for operative delivery. This review will focus on intrathecally administered opioids as used as part of CSE analgesia. Considerable research has focused on the optimum dose of opioids when delivered intrathecally, with or without adjuncts, in the CSE technique. Fentanyl and sufentanil, two of the lipophilic synthetic opioids, have emerged as the most useful. Bupivacaine, a long-acting local anaesthetic, is often added to prolong the duration of analgesia, although this tends to increase the likelihood of motor blockade of the lower extremities. Comparisons of the CSE technique with standard epidural practices have shown that both are effective means of providing analgesia during labour. Controversy revolves around the incidence of fetal bradycardia following CSE and whether this phenomenon increases the rate of operative deliveries. The rapid onset of analgesia with intrathecally administered opioids must be balanced against the added risks of dural puncture and considered in the context of the whole duration of labour. Ultimately, the decision to choose a CSE technique depends on the experience of the anaesthesia provider and the local availability of drugs, equipment and monitoring capabilities.

Ambulatory labor epidural analgesia: bupivacaine versus ropivacaine

Dilute concentrations of bupivacaine combined with fentanyl have recently been used to initiate labor epidural analgesia in an attempt to balance adequate analgesia and minimal maternal motor blockade. Similar concentrations of ropivacaine have not been evaluated. This prospective, randomized, double-blinded study was designed to compare the efficacy of 20 mL of either 0.08% bupivacaine plus 2 microg/mL fentanyl or 0.08% ropivacaine plus 2 microg/mL fentanyl to initiate ambulatory labor epidural analgesia. Forty nulliparous women in early (</=5 cm) established labor received either 20 mL of 0.08% bupivacaine plus 2 microg/mL fentanyl (BF) or 0.08% ropivacaine plus 2 microg/mL fentanyl (RF) to initiate epidural analgesia. One woman (BF) required supplemental analgesia, and two (one BF and one RF) had visual analog scale scores > 0 but < 20 at 20 min. The time (mean +/- SD) to visual analog scale score = 0 was BF (n = 18): 12.0 +/- 4.5 min and RF (n = 19): 12.4 +/- 4.0 min (P > 0.05). Spontaneous micturition was observed in 65% (13 of 20) BF compared with 100% (20 of 20) RF (P < 0.01), and ambulation was demonstrated in 75% (15 of 20) BF compared with 100% (20 of 20) RF (P < 0.03). The incidence of forceps delivery was 35% (7 of 20) BF compared with 10% (2 of 20) RF (P < 0.04). The results of this study indicate that dilute ropivacaine combined with fentanyl effectively initiates epidural analgesia while concurrently preserving maternal ability to void and ambulate.

IMPLICATIONS

As compared with a similar dilute concentration of bupivacaine, 20 mL of dilute (0.08%) ropivacaine combined with fentanyl (2 microg/mL) effectively initiates epidural analgesia in nulliparous women in early, established labor while preserving their ability to micturate and ambulate. Of importance, it appears that a true ambulatory epidural analgesic for women in labor is now possible.

Midwifery care research: what questions are being asked? What lessons have been learned?

PURPOSE

To create and critically evaluate a research database about midwifery care that identifies topics studied, research methods, results, funding, publication data, and implications for a future midwifery research agenda.

METHODS

Systematic literature review. Studies included were 1) data-based research; 2) about midwifery care or practice; 3) in the United States; and 4) published between 1984-1998. The CINAHL and MEDLINE electronic databases were searched using a defined strategy, and relevant journals and bibliographies were searched by hand.

RESULTS

This 15-year review identified 140 studies of midwifery care published in 161 papers. A midwife was the lead author on 60%. Sixty percent were published in the Journal of Nurse-Midwifery. Six to 15 studies were published each year, and both the number of publications and funding increased over the time period. The six major areas of focus were: 1) midwifery management, 2) structure of care, 3) midwifery practice, 4) midwife-physician comparisons, 5) place of birth, and 6) care of vulnerable populations.

DISCUSSION

Although retrospective descriptive studies still predominate, more prospective studies, randomized controlled trials, multi-site studies, and quasi-experimental designs are being conducted. Qualitative methods are helping to measure nontraditional outcomes. A research agenda should be established based on discussion and debate within the profession. Midwife investigators need to build research teams and collaborate with other disciplines. Key areas for future research include alternative therapies, breastfeeding, cost-effectiveness, cultural studies, gynecology, health policy, menopause, postpartum care, substance abuse interventions, and the woman's experience of birth and midwifery care.

Intrathecal sufentanil versus epidural lidocaine with epinephrine and sufentanil for early labor analgesia

Intrathecal sufentanil provides approximately 2 h of excellent labor analgesia with minimal motor blockade. Epidural sufentanil has received less scrutiny but may provide the same benefits as intrathecal sufentanil. In this study, we compared epidural sufentanil 40 microg after a lidocaine with an epinephrine test dose with intrathecal (i.t.) sufentanil 10 microg with respect to onset and duration of analgesia, degree of motor block, side effect profile, and mode of delivery. Seventy ASA physical status I or II parturients in early labor (< or = 4 cm cervical dilation) were randomized to receive either i.t. sufentanil 10 microg with a combined spinal-epidural technique (CSE) or epidural sufentanil 40 microg (e.p.) after epidural catheter placement and testing with 3 mL of 1.5% lidocaine with epinephrine (15 microg). After the administration of analgesia, pain scores and side effects were recorded for each patient at 5, 10, 15, 20, and 30 min, and every 30 min thereafter, by an observer blinded to the technique used. The study period was completed when the patients requested additional analgesia. All patients, except one, achieved adequate analgesia with the initial study dose and satisfactorily completed the study. There were no demographic differences between the two groups. Pain relief was rapid for all patients; pain scores were significantly lower at 5 and 10 min in the i.t. group versus the e.p. group. The mean duration of analgesia was similar between the e.p. group (127 +/- 40 min) and the i.t. group (110 +/- 48 min). No patient experienced any motor block. Side effects were similar between the two groups, except for pruritus-both the incidence and severity were significantly more profound at 5, 10, 15, 20, and 30 min in the i.t. group. There was no difference in time from analgesic to delivery, incidence of operative or assisted delivery, or cervical dilation at the time of redose. For early laboring patients, epidural sufentanil 40 microg after a lidocaine test dose provides analgesia comparable to that of i.t. sufentanil 10 microg with less pruritus.

IMPLICATIONS

We compared the efficacy and side effects of intrathecal sufentanil with epidural sufentanil with a local anesthetic test dose for analgesia during labor. Analgesia was equally good, although the intrathecal group experienced more itching.