-
International Journal of Nursing Studies Feb 2023Perineal massage during childbirth has been recommended as an effective measure to prevent perineal injury. However, the overall effects of perineal massage during... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Perineal massage during childbirth has been recommended as an effective measure to prevent perineal injury. However, the overall effects of perineal massage during childbirth on maternal and neonatal outcomes in primiparous women remain inconclusive. Particularly, the effects of perineal massage begun during different stages of labor need to be further investigated.
OBJECTIVES
To comprehensively review the effects of perineal massage during childbirth on primiparous health outcomes, including perineal-related outcomes, duration of labor, hemorrhage and postpartum perineal pain, and neonatal outcomes, including Apgar scores and neonatal complications, and to further explore the effects of perineal massage begun during different stages of labor.
DESIGN
A systematic review and meta-analysis following the Cochrane Handbook guidelines and PRISMA2020.
METHODS
A systematic search strategy was developed following the three-phase search approach, and the literature search was conducted in electronic databases and clinical trial registers from inception to 7th January 2022. Study selection and data extraction were completed independently by two researchers. The updated Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool for randomized trials was chosen to evaluate the quality of included studies. Data analyses were conducted using the Revman5.4 software, and subgroup analyses were performed based on the different start times of perineal massage. Furthermore, the certainty of body of evidence for each outcome was assessed utilizing the GRADEpro online tool.
RESULTS
Seventeen randomized controlled trials involving 3248 primiparous women were included in the review. The pooled results of meta-analyses indicated that perineal massage begun during the second stage of labor significantly increased the occurrence of intact perineum (RR = 2.78, 95 % CI: [1.52, 5.05], P < 0.001), reduced the rate of second- and third-degree perineal lacerations (P < 0.05), and decreased the incidence of episiotomy (RR = 0.63, 95 % CI: [0.50, 0.79], P < 0.001), while perineal massage during the first stage of labor effectively shortened the duration of the first and second stages of labor (P < 0.05). The available evidence also suggests the potential role of perineal massage on hemorrhage and long-term postpartum perineal pain (P < 0.05). However, the aggregated results failed to demonstrate the beneficial effects of perineal massage on neonatal outcomes (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
Perineal massage begun during the second stage of labor effectively improves the perineal-related outcomes in primiparous women, while perineal massage during the first stage of labor significantly shortens the duration of labor. High-quality studies exploring the standardized procedure for perineal massage and the short- and long-term effects of perineal massage are warranted.
REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42022302336 (PROSPERO).
Topics: Pregnancy; Infant, Newborn; Female; Humans; Perineum; Obstetric Labor Complications; Delivery, Obstetric; Massage; Pain; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36442355
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2022.104390 -
Women and Birth : Journal of the... Apr 2019Fear of childbirth negatively affects women during pregnancy and after birth.
PROBLEM
Fear of childbirth negatively affects women during pregnancy and after birth.
AIM
To summarise the findings of published studies regarding possible causes/predisposing factors and outcomes of fear of childbirth for childbearing women.
DESIGN
A systematic review, searching five databases in March 2015 for studies on causes/predisposing factors and outcomes of fear of childbirth, as measured during pregnancy and postpartum. Quality of included studies was assessed independently by pairs of authors. Data were extracted independently by reviewer pairs and described in a narrative analysis.
FINDINGS
Cross-sectional, register-based and case-control studies were included (n=21). Causes were grouped into population characteristics, mood-related aspects, and pregnancy and birth-related aspects. Outcomes were defined as mood-related or pregnancy and birth-related aspects. Differing definitions of fear of childbirth were found and meta-analysis could only be performed on parity, in a few studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Stress, anxiety, depression and lack of social support are associated with fear during pregnancy. Need for psychiatric care and presence of traumatic stress symptoms are reported outcomes together with prolonged labour, longer labours, use of epidural and obstetric complications. Nulliparous and parous women have similar levels of fear but for different reasons. Since the strongest predictor for fear in parous women is a previous negative birth experience or operative birth, we suggest it is important to distinguish between fear of childbirth and fear after birth. Findings demonstrate the need for creating woman-centred birthing environments where women can feel free and secure with low risk of negative or traumatic birth experiences and consequent fear.
Topics: Anxiety; Delivery, Obstetric; Depression; Fear; Female; Humans; Labor, Obstetric; Parity; Parturition; Pregnancy; Social Support
PubMed: 30115515
DOI: 10.1016/j.wombi.2018.07.004 -
Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis :... Aug 2020Thromboelastography (TEG) and rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM) are point-of-care viscoelastic devices that use whole blood samples to assess coagulation and... (Review)
Review
Thromboelastography (TEG) and rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM) are point-of-care viscoelastic devices that use whole blood samples to assess coagulation and fibrinolysis. These devices have been studied extensively in cardiac surgery, but there is limited robust evidence supporting its use in obstetrics. The hesitancy toward its routine use in obstetrics may be due to the current lack of randomized controlled trials and large observational studies. The study aims to systematically review studies that investigated TEG/ROTEM use in pregnancy or peripartum, and to provide recommendations for future studies to fill current research gaps. We performed a systematic review of studies on viscoelastic testing in obstetrics. Included studies were original research, used TEG or ROTEM during pregnancy or peripartum, and published in English. Ninety-three studies, spanning 31 years from 1989 to 2020 and with a total of 32,817 participants, were included. Sixty-two (66.7%) of the studies used TEG and 31 (33.3%) used ROTEM. To date, there are a total of two randomized controlled trials on TEG/ROTEM use in obstetrics. ROTEM may be used to guide transfusion therapy for postpartum hemorrhage. TEG and ROTEM can detect the hypercoagulable changes associated with pregnancy. Variability between study protocols and results suggests the need for future large prospective high-quality studies with standardized protocols to investigate the utility of TEG/ROTEM in assessing risk for thrombosis and hemorrhage as well as in guiding prophylaxis and treatment in obstetric patients. This review identifies the gaps and provides concrete recommendations for future studies to fill those gaps.
Topics: Blood Coagulation Disorders; Blood Transfusion; Female; Humans; Obstetrics; Pregnancy; Prospective Studies; Thrombelastography
PubMed: 32356929
DOI: 10.1111/jth.14882 -
Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology :... Jan 2021This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to critically evaluate and summarise all available evidence derived from randomised clinical trials (RCTs) regarding... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to critically evaluate and summarise all available evidence derived from randomised clinical trials (RCTs) regarding aromatherapy's effects on labour pain and anxiety relief. Literature search was performed in MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane library, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and Scopus since their respective inception to January 2019. Additionally, Google Scholar was also searched to explore citations of eligible final studies which were subsequently included in the systematic review. The search strategy used was: (pregnancy or pregnant or prenatal or antenatal or perinatal or maternal) AND (aromatherapy or essential oils or aroma therapy). Per inclusion and exclusion criteria established by the current study, nine RCTs were included in the systematic review. Results from the current study suggested that aromatherapy significantly decreased pain and anxiety in the first stage of labour.IMPACT STATEMENT Several studies have shown aromatherapy's effectiveness in relieving pain and anxiety for hospitalised patients and on relieving nausea and vomiting for women during pregnancy. Some results have further indicated that aromatherapy was effective in facilitating episiotomy healing and in reducing pain, fatigue and distress. Aromatherapy was also found to play a role in improving maternal moods; reducing post-caesarean pain; and preventing or mitigating stress, anxiety and depression after childbirth. Though most non-pharmaceutical pain management options were considered non-invasive and presumably safe for mothers and their foetuses, their exact efficacies remained unclear due to a lack of high quality evidence. This systematic review and meta-analysis summarises all evidence derived from RCTs wherein aromatherapy was performed as a supportive analgesic method during labour. Results of this meta-analysis identified more credible evidence validating that aromatherapy could significantly decrease labour pain both in early active and late active phases. Availability of credible evidence supporting aromatherapy's effectiveness on reducing physiological and psychological stress during pregnancy and childbirth would be useful, both theoretically and practically, for all stakeholders concerned, such as pregnant women, medicine and midwifery students, midwives, nurses, gynaecologists and health policymakers.
Topics: Adult; Anxiety; Aromatherapy; Female; Humans; Labor Pain; Labor Stage, First; Obstetric Labor Complications; Parity; Pregnancy; Young Adult
PubMed: 32666866
DOI: 10.1080/01443615.2019.1673707 -
Journal of Global Health Mar 2023Prolonged labour intensifies labour pain, and failure to address labour pain may lead to abnormal labour and augments the usage of operative interventions. Prolonged... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Prolonged labour intensifies labour pain, and failure to address labour pain may lead to abnormal labour and augments the usage of operative interventions. Prolonged labour is common among women, resulting in maternal morbidity, increased caesarean section (CS) rates, and postpartum complications. It may bring forth negative birth experiences that may increase the preference for CS. There is a dearth of evidence concerning the effectiveness of breathing exercises on the duration of labor. As per our knowledge, this is the first systematic review and meta-analysis on the effect of breathing exercises on the duration of labor. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to appraise the evidence concerning the effectiveness of breathing exercises on the duration of labour.
METHODS
Electronic databases MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), EMBASE, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and ClinicalKey were searched for randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies published in the English language between January 2005 to March 2022 that reported on the effectiveness of breathing exercises on the duration of labour. Duration of labour was the primary analysed outcome. The secondary outcomes assessed were anxiety, duration of pain, APGAR scores, episiotomy, and mode of delivery. Meta-analysis was done using RevMan v5.3.
RESULTS
The reviewed trials involved 1418 participants, and the study participants ranged from 70 to 320. The mean gestational weeks of the participants among the reported trials was 38.9 weeks. Breathing exercise shortened the duration of the intervention group's second stage of labour compared with the control group.
CONCLUSIONS
Breathing exercise is a beneficial preventive intervention in shortening the duration of second stage of labour.
REGISTRATION
The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021247126).
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Cesarean Section; Labor Pain; Labor, Obstetric; Breathing Exercises
PubMed: 36896808
DOI: 10.7189/jogh.13.04023 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2022Indications for the use of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) are broad and include prophylaxis for surgical site infections (SSIs). Existing evidence for the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Indications for the use of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) are broad and include prophylaxis for surgical site infections (SSIs). Existing evidence for the effectiveness of NPWT on postoperative wounds healing by primary closure remains uncertain.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of NPWT for preventing SSI in wounds healing through primary closure, and to assess the cost-effectiveness of NPWT in wounds healing through primary closure.
SEARCH METHODS
In January 2021, we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries and references of included studies, systematic reviews and health technology reports. There were no restrictions on language, publication date or study setting.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included trials if they allocated participants to treatment randomly and compared NPWT with any other type of wound dressing, or compared one type of NPWT with another.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors independently assessed trials using predetermined inclusion criteria. We carried out data extraction, assessment using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and quality assessment according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations methodology. Our primary outcomes were SSI, mortality, and wound dehiscence.
MAIN RESULTS
In this fourth update, we added 18 new randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and one new economic study, resulting in a total of 62 RCTs (13,340 included participants) and six economic studies. Studies evaluated NPWT in a wide range of surgeries, including orthopaedic, obstetric, vascular and general procedures. All studies compared NPWT with standard dressings. Most studies had unclear or high risk of bias for at least one key domain. Primary outcomes Eleven studies (6384 participants) which reported mortality were pooled. There is low-certainty evidence showing there may be a reduced risk of death after surgery for people treated with NPWT (0.84%) compared with standard dressings (1.17%) but there is uncertainty around this as confidence intervals include risk of benefits and harm; risk ratio (RR) 0.78 (95% CI 0.47 to 1.30; I = 0%). Fifty-four studies reported SSI; 44 studies (11,403 participants) were pooled. There is moderate-certainty evidence that NPWT probably results in fewer SSIs (8.7% of participants) than treatment with standard dressings (11.75%) after surgery; RR 0.73 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.85; I = 29%). Thirty studies reported wound dehiscence; 23 studies (8724 participants) were pooled. There is moderate-certainty evidence that there is probably little or no difference in dehiscence between people treated with NPWT (6.62%) and those treated with standard dressing (6.97%), although there is imprecision around the estimate that includes risk of benefit and harms; RR 0.97 (95% CI 0.82 to 1.16; I = 4%). Evidence was downgraded for imprecision, risk of bias, or a combination of these. Secondary outcomes There is low-certainty evidence for the outcomes of reoperation and seroma; in each case, confidence intervals included both benefit and harm. There may be a reduced risk of reoperation favouring the standard dressing arm, but this was imprecise: RR 1.13 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.41; I = 2%; 18 trials; 6272 participants). There may be a reduced risk of seroma for people treated with NPWT but this is imprecise: the RR was 0.82 (95% CI 0.65 to 1.05; I = 0%; 15 trials; 5436 participants). For skin blisters, there is low-certainty evidence that people treated with NPWT may be more likely to develop skin blisters compared with those treated with standard dressing (RR 3.55; 95% CI 1.43 to 8.77; I = 74%; 11 trials; 5015 participants). The effect of NPWT on haematoma is uncertain (RR 0.79; 95 % CI 0.48 to 1.30; I = 0%; 17 trials; 5909 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There is low-certainty evidence of little to no difference in reported pain between groups. Pain was measured in different ways and most studies could not be pooled; this GRADE assessment is based on all fourteen trials reporting pain; the pooled RR for the proportion of participants who experienced pain was 1.52 (95% CI 0.20, 11.31; I = 34%; two studies; 632 participants). Cost-effectiveness Six economic studies, based wholly or partially on trials in our review, assessed the cost-effectiveness of NPWT compared with standard care. They considered NPWT in five indications: caesarean sections in obese women; surgery for lower limb fracture; knee/hip arthroplasty; coronary artery bypass grafts; and vascular surgery with inguinal incisions. They calculated quality-adjusted life-years or an equivalent, and produced estimates of the treatments' relative cost-effectiveness. The reporting quality was good but the evidence certainty varied from moderate to very low. There is moderate-certainty evidence that NPWT in surgery for lower limb fracture was not cost-effective at any threshold of willingness-to-pay and that NPWT is probably cost-effective in obese women undergoing caesarean section. Other studies found low or very low-certainty evidence indicating that NPWT may be cost-effective for the indications assessed.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
People with primary closure of their surgical wound and treated prophylactically with NPWT following surgery probably experience fewer SSIs than people treated with standard dressings but there is probably no difference in wound dehiscence (moderate-certainty evidence). There may be a reduced risk of death after surgery for people treated with NPWT compared with standard dressings but there is uncertainty around this as confidence intervals include risk of benefit and harm (low-certainty evidence). People treated with NPWT may experience more instances of skin blistering compared with standard dressing treatment (low-certainty evidence). There are no clear differences in other secondary outcomes where most evidence is low or very low-certainty. Assessments of cost-effectiveness of NPWT produced differing results in different indications. There is a large number of ongoing studies, the results of which may change the findings of this review. Decisions about use of NPWT should take into account surgical indication and setting and consider evidence for all outcomes.
Topics: Blister; Humans; Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy; Pain; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Seroma; Soft Tissue Injuries; Surgical Wound; Surgical Wound Infection
PubMed: 35471497
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009261.pub7 -
International Journal of Qualitative... Dec 2020: Women's experiences of pregnancy, labour and birth are for some pregnant women negative and they develop a fear of childbirth, which can have consequences for their... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
: Women's experiences of pregnancy, labour and birth are for some pregnant women negative and they develop a fear of childbirth, which can have consequences for their wellbeing and health. The aim was to synthesize qualitative literature to deepen the understanding of women's experiences of fear of childbirth.: A systematic literature search and a meta-synthesis that included 14 qualitative papers.: The main results demonstrate a deepened understanding of women's experiences of fear of childbirth interpreted through the metaphor "being at a point of no return". Being at this point meant that the women thought there was no turning back from their situation, further described in the three themes: To suffer consequences from traumatic births, To lack warranty and understanding, and To face the fear.: Women with fear of childbirth are need of support that can meet their existential issues about being at this point of no return, allowing them to express and integrate their feelings, experiences and expectations during pregnancy, childbirth and after birth.Women with fear after birth, i.e., after an earlier negative birth experience, need support that enables them to regain trust in maternity care professionals and their willingness to provide them with good care that offers the support that individual women require. Women pregnant for the first time require similar support to reassure them that other's experiences will not happen to them.
Topics: Attitude to Health; Delivery, Obstetric; Fear; Female; Humans; Parturition; Pregnancy; Pregnant Women; Qualitative Research; Trust
PubMed: 31858891
DOI: 10.1080/17482631.2019.1704484 -
Women and Birth : Journal of the... Sep 2015Experiencing psychological distress such as depression, anxiety, and/or perceived stress during pregnancy may increase the risk for adverse birth outcomes, including... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Experiencing psychological distress such as depression, anxiety, and/or perceived stress during pregnancy may increase the risk for adverse birth outcomes, including preterm birth. Clarifying the association between exposure and outcome may improve the understanding of risk factors for prematurity and guide future clinical and research practices.
AIM
The aims of the present review were to outline the evidence on the risk of preterm associated with antenatal depression, anxiety, and stress.
METHODS
Four electronic database searches were conducted to identify quantitative population-based, multi-centre, cohort studies and randomised-controlled trial studies focusing on the association between antenatal depression, anxiety, and stress, and preterm birth published in English between 1980 and 2013.
FINDINGS
Of 1469 electronically retrieved articles, 39 peer-reviewed studies met the final selection criteria and were included in this review following the PRISMA and MOOSE review guidelines. Information was extracted on study characteristics; depression, anxiety and perceived stress were examined as separate and combined exposures. There is strong evidence that antenatal distress during the pregnancy increases the likelihood of preterm birth.
CONCLUSION
Complex paths of significant interactions between depression, anxiety and stress, risk factors and preterm birth were indicated in both direct and indirect ways. The effects of pregnancy distress were associated with spontaneous but not with medically indicated preterm birth. Health practitioners engaged in providing perinatal care to women, such as obstetricians, midwives, nurses, and mental health specialists need to provide appropriate support to women experiencing psychological distress in order to improve outcomes for both mothers and infants.
Topics: Anxiety; Depression; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Maternal Behavior; Maternal Health; Mothers; Obstetric Labor Complications; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Premature Birth; Risk Factors; Stress, Psychological
PubMed: 25765470
DOI: 10.1016/j.wombi.2015.02.003 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2017Periodontal disease has been linked with a number of conditions, such as cardiovascular disease, stroke, diabetes and adverse pregnancy outcomes, all likely through... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Periodontal disease has been linked with a number of conditions, such as cardiovascular disease, stroke, diabetes and adverse pregnancy outcomes, all likely through systemic inflammatory pathways. It is common in women of reproductive age and gum conditions tend to worsen during pregnancy. Some evidence from observational studies suggests that periodontal intervention may reduce adverse pregnancy outcomes. There is need for a comprehensive Cochrane review of randomised trials to assess the effect of periodontal treatment on perinatal and maternal health.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of treating periodontal disease in pregnant women in order to prevent or reduce perinatal and maternal morbidity and mortality.
SEARCH METHODS
Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 6 October 2016), Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (to 7 October 2016), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 9) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 6 October 2016), Embase Ovid (1980 to 6 October 2016), and LILACS BIREME Virtual Health Library (Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database; 1982 to 6 October 2016). ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials on 6 October 2016. We placed no restrictions on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effects of periodontal treatment in preventing or reducing perinatal and maternal morbidity and mortality. We excluded studies where obstetric outcomes were not reported.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts and extracted data using a prepiloted data extraction form. Missing data were obtained by contacting authors and risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane's 'Risk of bias' tool. Where appropriate, results of comparable trials were pooled and expressed as risk ratios (RR) or mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) . The random-effects model was used for pooling except where there was an insufficient number of studies. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
There were 15 RCTs (n = 7161 participants) meeting our inclusion criteria. All the included studies were at high risk of bias mostly due to lack of blinding and imbalance in baseline characteristics of participants. The studies recruited pregnant women from prenatal care facilities who had periodontitis (14 studies) or gingivitis (1 study).The two main comparisons were: periodontal treatment versus no treatment during pregnancy and periodontal treatment versus alternative periodontal treatment. The head-to-head comparison between periodontal treatments assessed a more intensive treatment versus a less intensive one.Eleven studies compared periodontal treatment with no treatment during pregnancy. The meta-analysis shows no clear difference in preterm birth < 37 weeks (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.10; 5671 participants; 11 studies; low-quality evidence) between periodontal treatment and no treatment. There is low-quality evidence that periodontal treatment may reduce low birth weight < 2500 g (9.70% with periodontal treatment versus 12.60% without treatment; RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.95; 3470 participants; 7 studies).It is unclear whether periodontal treatment leads to a difference in preterm birth < 35 weeks (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.76; 2557 participants; 2 studies; ) and < 32 weeks (RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.32; 2755 participants; 3 studies), low birth weight < 1500 g (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.70; 2550 participants; 2 studies), perinatal mortality (including fetal and neonatal deaths up to the first 28 days after birth) (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.43; 5320 participants; 7 studies; very low-quality evidence), and pre-eclampsia (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.62; 2946 participants; 3 studies; very low-quality evidence). There is no evidence of a difference in small for gestational age (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.16; 3610 participants; 3 studies; low-quality evidence) when periodontal treatment is compared with no treatment.Four studies compared periodontal treatment with alternative periodontal treatment. Data pooling was not possible due to clinical heterogeneity. The outcomes reported were preterm birth < 37 weeks, preterm birth < 35 weeks, birth weight < 2500 g, birth weight < 1500 g and perinatal mortality (very low-quality evidence). It is unclear whether there is a difference in < 37 weeks, preterm birth < 35 weeks, birth weight < 2500 g, birth weight < 1500 g and perinatal mortality when different periodontal treatments are compared because the quality of evidence is very low.Maternal mortality and adverse effects of the intervention did not occur in any of the studies that reported on either of the outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
It is not clear if periodontal treatment during pregnancy has an impact on preterm birth (low-quality evidence). There is low-quality evidence that periodontal treatment may reduce low birth weight (< 2500 g), however, our confidence in the effect estimate is limited. There is insufficient evidence to determine which periodontal treatment is better in preventing adverse obstetric outcomes. Future research should aim to report periodontal outcomes alongside obstetric outcomes.
Topics: Female; Gingivitis; Humans; Infant, Low Birth Weight; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Small for Gestational Age; Perinatal Mortality; Periodontal Diseases; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Pregnancy Outcome; Premature Birth; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 28605006
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005297.pub3 -
Reproductive Health May 2018A negative experience in childbirth is associated with chronic maternal morbidities. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to identify currently... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
A negative experience in childbirth is associated with chronic maternal morbidities. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to identify currently available successful interventions to create a positive perception of childbirth experience which can prevent psychological birth trauma.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials of interventions in pregnancy or labour which aimed to improve childbirth experience versus usual care were identified from 1994 to September 2016. Low risk pregnant or childbearing women were chosen as the study population. PEDRO scale and Cochrane risk of bias tool were used for quality assessment. Pooled effect estimates were calculated when more than two studies had similar intervention. If it was not possible to include a study in the meta-analysis, its data were summarized narratively.
RESULTS
After screening of 7832 titles/abstracts, 20 trials including 22,800 participants from 12 countries were included. Successful strategies to create a positive perception of childbirth experience were supporting women during birth (Risk Ratio = 1.35, 95% Confidence Interval: 1.07 to 1.71), intrapartum care with minimal intervention (Risk Ratio = 1.29, 95% Confidence Interval:1.15 to 1.45) and birth preparedness and readiness for complications (Mean Difference = 3.27, 95% Confidence Interval: 0.66 to 5.88). Most of the relaxation and pain relief strategies were not successful to create a positive birth experience (Mean Difference = - 2.64, 95% Confidence Intervention: - 6.80 to 1.52).
CONCLUSION
The most effective strategies to create a positive birth experience are supporting women during birth, intrapartum care with minimal intervention and birth preparedness. This study might be helpful in clinical approaches and designing future studies about prevention of the negative and traumatic birth experiences.
Topics: Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Labor, Obstetric; Pain Management; Parturition; Patient Satisfaction; Perception; Postpartum Period; Prenatal Care; Stress, Psychological
PubMed: 29720201
DOI: 10.1186/s12978-018-0511-x