Comparison of the Effects of Maternal Supportive Care and Acupressure (at BL32 Acupoint) on Labor Length and Infant's Apgar Score

Effect of Acupressure on Procedural Pain in Children: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

Acupressure is a complementary treatment method performed using fingers and hands to maintain the body's energy balance by stimulating acupuncture points. In recent studies, acupressure has been widely used for minimally invasive procedural (venous assess, intravenous (IV) cannulation, intramuscular injection, heel lancing) pain management in children. This study aims to systematically review the studies that evaluate the effectiveness of acupressure on minimally invasive procedural pain in children.

DESIGN

This study is a systematic review of literature.

METHODS

Studies were obtained by screening literature on this topic using the databases PubMed, EBSCO, Scopus, Google Scholar and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The keywords "Acupressure," "Child," "Pain," and "Procedural" were used when screening the literature. The studies selected were those published from January 1, 2000 to January 1, 2022 that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The PRISMA checklist was used when performing this systematic review. The Oxford Center for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence Working Group (2011) table was used to assess the level of evidence. The procedures for this systematic review were preregistered in the PROSPERO (CRD42022320155) database.

FINDINGS

Of the 12,624 records identified, 10 nursing studies that met the research selection criteria were included in the advanced analysis. These papers were further reviewed for their study design, adequacy of randomization and concealment of allocation, blinding of participants, interventions, and outcome measurements.

CONCLUSIONS

Acupressure has been shown to be effective in relieving minimally invasive procedural pain in children. This review begins to establish a credible evidence base for the use of acupressure in minimally invasive procedural pain relief in pediatric age groups. The implication for nurses includes incorporating acupressure into their practice as an alternative therapy for children who suffer from minimally invasive procedural pain.

Assessment of educational intervention and Acupressure during labor on the mother's anxiety level and arterial oxygen pressure of the umbilical cord of infants (PO2). A randomized controlled clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Natural delivery is distressing, and the mother's anxiety in this condition can have negative impacts on the fetus, mother, and the delivery process. Hence, many women tend to use pharmacological or nonpharmacological methods for reduction of labor stress and anxiety. The aim was to assess the effect of supportive care and acupressure during labor on the mother's anxiety level and arterial oxygen pressure of the umbilical cord of infants.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This performed on 150 pregnant women were randomly assigned to two interventions and a control group in the delivery ward of the selected educational center of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (Shoushtari Hospital) in Iran. Mothers' anxiety scores before (beginning of the active stage of labor) and after intervention (the end of the first stage of labor) were measured using Spielberger's questionnaire. Then, infants' cord blood samples for arterial blood gas and hematologic analyses were sent to the hospital's laboratory. After all, the data with SPSS version 16 and using Pearson's correlation coefficient, one-way ANOVA, were analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean of anxiety score in the control group was 21.1% and in the supportive group and the acupressure group, respectively, decreased by 37.5% and 34.8%, respectively (P < 0.001). The mean of PO₂ was also reported in the maternal supportive, acupressure, and control groups, 40.4 ± 8.8, 27.4 ± 2.8, and 18.1 ± 3.7, respectively. Additionally, a significant correlation was found between mothers' anxiety scores after the intervention and the mean of PO₂ (P = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

The supportive care and acupressure at BL32 acupoint reduced mothers' anxiety and consequently improved fetal oxygenation. Therefore, these methods are recommended to be used during labor for improving birth outcomes.

Acupressure and Acupuncture Use in the Peripartum Period

Acupuncture is the procedure of inserting fine needles into specific points on the body for therapeutic purposes. Acupuncture and its derivatives (acupressure, moxibustion, electroacupuncture, and transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation on acupoints) are a popular treatment choice in the peripartum period (32 wk' gestation to 14 d postdelivery). There is substantial research evidence supporting acupuncture and its derivatives in the peripartum period. Benefits in the use of acupressure to reduce labor pain intensity and a reduction in the duration of labor with acupressure have been found. There is mixed evidence for the use of both moxibustion and moxibustion with acupuncture for noncephalic presentations and for acupressure for reducing intraoperative nausea. There is limited evidence available on acupuncture use in women with high-risk pregnancies or multifetal gestations.

Using Acupuncture in Labor Pain and Childbirth-Related Issues: A Narrative Review

BACKGROUND

Latent threats, such as prolonged labor duration and postpartum hemorrhage, endanger women and newborns during and post childbirth, which produce burdens on natal care and public health expenditures. Acupuncture, a traditional Chinese medical practice, has increasingly been used for labor delivery in various countries to cope with these problems.

METHOD

This narrative review searched 29 English and Chinese electronic databases. Thirty-one empirical studies, carried out in Asia, America, Africa, the Middle East, Europe, and Australia were reviewed according to inclusion and exclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Acupuncture is adopted with positive signs toward labor pain relief, delivery mode, labor duration, postpartum hemorrhage, APGAR score (an evaluation for a neonatal evaluation), and birth weight.

DISCUSSION

With support of earlier studies, the satisfactory effects of acupuncture on labor delivery reviewed in this research have been noted by obstetric researchers and scholars, physicians, nurses, and midwives.

CONCLUSION

This review recommends the use of acupuncture in obstetric profession with respect to maternal-related healthcare.

Effects of ear and body acupressure on labor pain and duration of labor active phase: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to compare the effects of multi-point ear and body acupressure on labor pain and the duration of labor active phase.

DESIGN

Three-armed randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Kowsar Hospital, Qazvin, Iran.

INTERVENTION

Participants in the body acupressure group received acupressure on GB21, GB30, BL32, LI4, and SP6 points, each for two minutes, at cervical dilation of four, six, and eight centimeters. For participants in the ear acupressure group, adhesive auriculotherapy-specific Vaccaria seeds were attached to their auricles on the zero, genitalia, Shen Men, thalamic, and uterine 1 and 2 acupoints. The seeds were compressed every thirty minutes, each time for thirty seconds. Participants in the control group received routine care services.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Labor pain intensity was assessed using a visual analogue scale at cervical dilation of four and ten centimeters.

RESULTS

While there was no significant difference between mean scores of pain among three groups, mean score of labor pain in both acupressure groups was significantly less than that in the control group (P < 0.001). However, the difference between the acupressure groups was not statistically significant (P = 0.12). Moreover, the duration of labor active phase in the ear acupressure group was significantly less than those in the body acupressure and the control groups (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Ear acupressure was significantly effective in reducing labor pain and shortening labor active phase. However, body acupressure solely reduces labor pain. Therefore, ear acupressure can be used to reduce labor pain and shorten labor active phase.

Coverage, associated factors, and impact of companionship during labor: A large-scale observational study in six hospitals in Nepal

BACKGROUND

Companionship at the time of birth is a nonclinical intervention that has been proven to improve the quality of intrapartum care. This study aims to evaluate the coverage, associated factors, and impact of companionship during labor at public hospitals in Nepal.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional observational study in six public hospitals in Nepal. The study was conducted from July 2018 to August 2018. Data were collected on sociodemographic, maternal, obstetric, and neonatal characteristics from patient case notes and through predischarge interviews. Coverage of companionship during labor and its association with intrapartum care was analyzed. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were done to assess the association between companionship during labor and demographic, obstetric, and neonatal characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 63 077 women participated in the study with 19% of them having a companion during labor. Women aged 19-24 years had 65% higher odds of having a companion during labor compared with women aged 35 years and older (aOR 1.65 [95% CI, 1.40-1.94]). Women who were from an advantaged ethnic group (Chhetri/Brahmin) had fourfold higher odds of having a companion than women from a disadvantaged group (aOR 3.84; [95% CI, 3.24-4.52]). Women who had companions during labor had fewer unnecessary cesarean births than those who had no companions (5.2% vs 6.8%, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

In Nepal, sociodemographic factors affect women's likelihood of having a companion during labor. As companionship during labor is associated with improved quality of care, health facilities should encourage women's access to birth companions.

Acupuncture or acupressure for pain management during labour

BACKGROUND

Many women would like to avoid pharmacological or invasive methods of pain management in labour and this may contribute towards the popularity of complementary methods of pain management. This review examined evidence about the use of acupuncture and acupressure for pain management in labour. This is an update of a review last published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effects of acupuncture and acupressure for pain management in labour.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, (25 February 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (the Cochrane Library 2019, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1966 to February 2019), CINAHL (1980 to February 2019), ClinicalTrials.gov (February 2019), the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platfory (ICTRP) (February 2019) and reference lists of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing acupuncture or acupressure with placebo, no treatment or other non-pharmacological forms of pain management in labour. We included all women whether nulliparous or multiparous, and in spontaneous or induced labour. We included studies reported in abstract form if there was sufficient information to permit assessment of risk of bias. Trials using a cluster-RCT design were eligible for inclusion, but quasi-RCTs or cross-over studies were not.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 28 trials with data reporting on 3960 women. Thirteen trials reported on acupuncture and 15 trials reported on acupressure. No study was at a low risk of bias on all domains. Pain intensity was generally measured on a visual analogue scale (VAS) of 0 to 10 or 0 to 100 with low scores indicating less pain. Acupuncture versus sham acupuncture Acupuncture may make little or no difference to the intensity of pain felt by women when compared with sham acupuncture (mean difference (MD) -4.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) -12.94 to 4.09, 2 trials, 325 women, low-certainty evidence). Acupuncture may increase satisfaction with pain relief compared to sham acupuncture (risk ratio (RR) 2.38, 95% CI 1.78 to 3.19, 1 trial, 150 women, moderate-certainty evidence), and probably reduces the use of pharmacological analgesia (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.89, 2 trials, 261 women, moderate-certainty evidence). Acupuncture may have no effect on assisted vaginal birth (very low-certainty evidence), and probably little to no effect on caesarean section (low-certainty evidence). Acupuncture compared to usual care We are uncertain if acupuncture reduces pain intensity compared to usual care because the evidence was found to be very low certainty (standardised mean difference (SMD) -1.31, 95% CI -2.14 to -0.49, 4 trials, 495 women, I² = 93%). Acupuncture may have little to no effect on satisfaction with pain relief (low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if acupuncture reduces the use of pharmacological analgesia because the evidence was found to be very low certainty (average RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.85, 6 trials, 1059 women, I² = 70%). Acupuncture probably has little to no effect on assisted vaginal birth (low-certainty evidence) or caesarean section (low-certainty evidence). Acupuncture compared to no treatment One trial compared acupuncture to no treatment. We are uncertain if acupuncture reduces pain intensity (MD -1.16, 95% CI -1.51 to -0.81, 163 women, very low-certainty evidence), assisted vaginal birth or caesarean section because the evidence was found to be very low certainty. Acupuncture compared to sterile water injection We are uncertain if acupuncture has any effect on use of pharmacological analgesia, assisted vaginal birth or caesarean section because the evidence was found to be very low certainty. Acupressure compared to a sham control We are uncertain if acupressure reduces pain intensity in labour (MD -1.93, 95% CI -3.31 to -0.55, 6 trials, 472 women) or assisted vaginal birth because the evidence was found to be very low certainty. Acupressure may have little to no effect on use of pharmacological analgesia (low-certainty evidence). Acupressure probably reduces the caesarean section rate (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.71, 4 trials, 313 women, moderate-certainty evidence). Acupressure compared to usual care We are uncertain if acupressure reduces pain intensity in labour (SMD -1.07, 95% CI -1.45 to -0.69, 8 trials, 620 women) or increases satisfaction with pain relief (MD 1.05, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.35, 1 trial, 105 women) because the evidence was found to be very low certainty. Acupressure may have little to no effect on caesarean section (low-certainty evidence). Acupressure compared to a combined control Acupressure probably slightly reduces the intensity of pain during labour compared with the combined control (measured on a scale of 0 to 10 with low scores indicating less pain) (SMD -0.42, 95% CI -0.65 to -0.18, 2 trials, 322 women, moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if acupressure has any effect on the use of pharmacological analgesia (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.25, 1 trial, 212 women), satisfaction with childbirth, assisted vaginal birth or caesarean section because the certainty of the evidence was all very low. No studies were found that reported on sense of control in labour and only one reported on satisfaction with the childbirth experience.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Acupuncture in comparison to sham acupuncture may increase satisfaction with pain management and reduce use of pharmacological analgesia. Acupressure in comparison to a combined control and usual care may reduce pain intensity. However, for other comparisons of acupuncture and acupressure, we are uncertain about the effects on pain intensity and satisfaction with pain relief due to very low-certainty evidence. Acupuncture may have little to no effect on the rates of caesarean or assisted vaginal birth. Acupressure probably reduces the need for caesarean section in comparison to a sham control. There is a need for further high-quality research that include sham controls and comparisons to usual care and report on the outcomes of sense of control in labour, satisfaction with the childbirth experience or satisfaction with pain relief.

Massage, reflexology and other manual methods for pain management in labour

BACKGROUND

Many women would like to avoid pharmacological or invasive methods of pain management in labour, and this may contribute towards the popularity of complementary methods of pain management. This review examined the evidence currently available on manual methods, including massage and reflexology, for pain management in labour. This review is an update of the review first published in 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect, safety and acceptability of massage, reflexology and other manual methods to manage pain in labour.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (30 June 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 6), MEDLINE (1966 to 30 June 2017, CINAHL (1980 to 30 June 2017), the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (4 August 2017), Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (4 August 2017), ClinicalTrials.gov, (4 August 2017), the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (4 August 2017), the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (4 August 2017) and reference lists of retrieved trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing manual methods with standard care, other non-pharmacological forms of pain management in labour, no treatment or placebo. We searched for trials of the following modalities: massage, warm packs, thermal manual methods, reflexology, chiropractic, osteopathy, musculo-skeletal manipulation, deep tissue massage, neuro-muscular therapy, shiatsu, tuina, trigger point therapy, myotherapy and zero balancing. We excluded trials for pain management relating to hypnosis, aromatherapy, acupuncture and acupressure; these are included in other Cochrane reviews.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality, extracted data and checked data for accuracy. We contacted trial authors for additional information. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 14 trials; 10 of these (1055 women) contributed data to meta-analysis. Four trials, involving 274 women, met our inclusion criteria but did not contribute data to the review. Over half the trials had a low risk of bias for random sequence generation and attrition bias. The majority of trials had a high risk of performance bias and detection bias, and an unclear risk of reporting bias. We found no trials examining the effectiveness of reflexology.MassageWe found low-quality evidence that massage provided a greater reduction in pain intensity (measured using self-reported pain scales) than usual care during the first stage of labour (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.06 to -0.56, six trials, 362 women). Two trials reported on pain intensity during the second and third stages of labour, and there was evidence of a reduction in pain scores in favour of massage (SMD -0.98, 95% CI -2.23 to 0.26, 124 women; and SMD -1.03, 95% CI -2.17 to 0.11, 122 women). There was very low-quality evidence showing no clear benefit of massage over usual care for the length of labour (in minutes) (mean difference (MD) 20.64, 95% CI -58.24 to 99.52, six trials, 514 women), and pharmacological pain relief (average risk ratio (RR) 0.81, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.74, four trials, 105 women). There was very low-quality evidence showing no clear benefit of massage for assisted vaginal birth (average RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.13, four trials, 368 women) and caesarean section (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.09, six trials, 514 women). One trial reported less anxiety during the first stage of labour for women receiving massage (MD -16.27, 95% CI -27.03 to -5.51, 60 women). One trial found an increased sense of control from massage (MD 14.05, 95% CI 3.77 to 24.33, 124 women, low-quality evidence). Two trials examining satisfaction with the childbirth experience reported data on different scales; both found more satisfaction with massage, although the evidence was low quality in one study and very low in the other.Warm packsWe found very low-quality evidence for reduced pain (Visual Analogue Scale/VAS) in the first stage of labour (SMD -0.59, 95% CI -1.18 to -0.00, three trials, 191 women), and the second stage of labour (SMD -1.49, 95% CI -2.85 to -0.13, two trials, 128 women). Very low-quality evidence showed reduced length of labour (minutes) in the warm-pack group (MD -66.15, 95% CI -91.83 to -40.47; two trials; 128 women).Thermal manual methodsOne trial evaluated thermal manual methods versus usual care and found very low-quality evidence of reduced pain intensity during the first phase of labour for women receiving thermal methods (MD -1.44, 95% CI -2.24 to -0.65, one trial, 96 women). There was a reduction in the length of labour (minutes) (MD -78.24, 95% CI -118.75 to -37.73, one trial, 96 women, very low-quality evidence). There was no clear difference for assisted vaginal birth (very low-quality evidence). Results were similar for cold packs versus usual care, and intermittent hot and cold packs versus usual care, for pain intensity, length of labour and assisted vaginal birth.Music One trial that compared manual methods with music found very low-quality evidence of reduced pain intensity during labour in the massage group (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.89, 101 women). There was no evidence of benefit for reduced use of pharmacological pain relief (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.08, very low-quality evidence).Of the seven outcomes we assessed using GRADE, only pain intensity was reported in all comparisons. Satisfaction with the childbirth experience, sense of control, and caesarean section were rarely reported in any of the comparisons.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Massage, warm pack and thermal manual methods may have a role in reducing pain, reducing length of labour and improving women's sense of control and emotional experience of labour, although the quality of evidence varies from low to very low and few trials reported on the key GRADE outcomes. Few trials reported on safety as an outcome. There is a need for further research to address these outcomes and to examine the effectiveness and efficacy of these manual methods for pain management.

Continuous support for women during childbirth

BACKGROUND

Historically, women have generally been attended and supported by other women during labour. However, in hospitals worldwide, continuous support during labour has often become the exception rather than the routine.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to assess the effects, on women and their babies, of continuous, one-to-one intrapartum support compared with usual care, in any setting. Secondary objectives were to determine whether the effects of continuous support are influenced by:1. Routine practices and policies in the birth environment that may affect a woman's autonomy, freedom of movement and ability to cope with labour, including: policies about the presence of support people of the woman's own choosing; epidural analgesia; and continuous electronic fetal monitoring.2. The provider's relationship to the woman and to the facility: staff member of the facility (and thus has additional loyalties or responsibilities); not a staff member and not part of the woman's social network (present solely for the purpose of providing continuous support, e.g. a doula); or a person chosen by the woman from family members and friends;3. Timing of onset (early or later in labour);4. Model of support (support provided only around the time of childbirth or extended to include support during the antenatal and postpartum periods);5. Country income level (high-income compared to low- and middle-income).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 October 2016), ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (1 June 2017) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All published and unpublished randomised controlled trials, cluster-randomised trials comparing continuous support during labour with usual care. Quasi-randomised and cross-over designs were not eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We sought additional information from the trial authors. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 27 trials, and 26 trials involving 15,858 women provided usable outcome data for analysis. These trials were conducted in 17 different countries: 13 trials were conducted in high-income settings; 13 trials in middle-income settings; and no studies in low-income settings. Women allocated to continuous support were more likely to have a spontaneous vaginal birth (average RR 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04 to 1.12; 21 trials, 14,369 women; low-quality evidence) and less likely to report negative ratings of or feelings about their childbirth experience (average RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.79; 11 trials, 11,133 women; low-quality evidence) and to use any intrapartum analgesia (average RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.96; 15 trials, 12,433 women). In addition, their labours were shorter (MD -0.69 hours, 95% CI -1.04 to -0.34; 13 trials, 5429 women; low-quality evidence), they were less likely to have a caesarean birth (average RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.88; 24 trials, 15,347 women; low-quality evidence) or instrumental vaginal birth (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.96; 19 trials, 14,118 women), regional analgesia (average RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.99; 9 trials, 11,444 women), or a baby with a low five-minute Apgar score (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.85; 14 trials, 12,615 women). Data from two trials for postpartum depression were not combined due to differences in women, hospitals and care providers included; both trials found fewer women developed depressive symptomatology if they had been supported in birth, although this may have been a chance result in one of the studies (low-quality evidence). There was no apparent impact on other intrapartum interventions, maternal or neonatal complications, such as admission to special care nursery (average RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.25; 7 trials, 8897 women; low-quality evidence), and exclusive or any breastfeeding at any time point (average RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.16; 4 trials, 5584 women; low-quality evidence).Subgroup analyses suggested that continuous support was most effective at reducing caesarean birth, when the provider was present in a doula role, and in settings in which epidural analgesia was not routinely available. Continuous labour support in settings where women were not permitted to have companions of their choosing with them in labour, was associated with greater likelihood of spontaneous vaginal birth and lower likelihood of a caesarean birth. Subgroup analysis of trials conducted in high-income compared with trials in middle-income countries suggests that continuous labour support offers similar benefits to women and babies for most outcomes, with the exception of caesarean birth, where studies from middle-income countries showed a larger reduction in caesarean birth. No conclusions could be drawn about low-income settings, electronic fetal monitoring, the timing of onset of continuous support or model of support.Risk of bias varied in included studies: no study clearly blinded women and personnel; only one study sufficiently blinded outcome assessors. All other domains were of varying degrees of risk of bias. The quality of evidence was downgraded for lack of blinding in studies and other limitations in study designs, inconsistency, or imprecision of effect estimates.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Continuous support during labour may improve outcomes for women and infants, including increased spontaneous vaginal birth, shorter duration of labour, and decreased caesarean birth, instrumental vaginal birth, use of any analgesia, use of regional analgesia, low five-minute Apgar score and negative feelings about childbirth experiences. We found no evidence of harms of continuous labour support. Subgroup analyses should be interpreted with caution, and considered as exploratory and hypothesis-generating, but evidence suggests continuous support with certain provider characteristics, in settings where epidural analgesia was not routinely available, in settings where women were not permitted to have companions of their choosing in labour, and in middle-income country settings, may have a favourable impact on outcomes such as caesarean birth. Future research on continuous support during labour could focus on longer-term outcomes (breastfeeding, mother-infant interactions, postpartum depression, self-esteem, difficulty mothering) and include more woman-centred outcomes in low-income settings.