McFarlin B L, Gibson M H, O'Rear J, Harman P
West Virginia University School of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Morgantown 26506-9186, USA.
J Nurse Midwifery. 1999 May-Jun;44(3):205-16. doi: 10.1016/s0091-2182(99)00037-3.
To document the use of herbal preparations for cervical ripening, induction, and augmentation of labor by certified nurse-midwives (CNMs) and nurse-midwifery education programs, a national survey of 500 members of the American College of Nurse-Midwives was conducted. Forty eight nurse-midwifery education programs were also surveyed to determine whether they were formally or informally educating students in the use of herbal preparations for cervical ripening, induction, or augmentation of labor. The results of this study, a review of the literature, professional issues, and recommendations for clinical practice are presented in this article. Of 500 questionnaires mailed to ACNM members, 90 were returned from CNMs who used herbal preparations to stimulate labor and 82 were returned from CNMs who did not use herbal preparations to stimulate labor. Three questionnaires were excluded due to incomplete data or blank questionnaires. No significant differences were noted in relations to geographical region, midwifery education, or highest level of education between the CNM respondents who did and those who did not use alternative methods to stimulate labor. Of the CNMs who used herbal preparations to stimulate labor, 64% used blue cohosh, 45% used black cohosh, 63% used red raspberry leaf, 93% used castor oil, and 60% used evening primrose oil. CNMs who used herbal preparations to stimulate labor were younger (43 versus 45 years, P < .01) and more likely to deliver at home or in an in-hospital or out-of-hospital birthing center (P < .0006), than CNMs who never used herbal preparations to stimulate labor. The most cited reason for using herbal preparations to stimulate labor was that they are "natural," whereas the most common reason for not using herbal preparations was the lack of research or experience with the safety of these substances. Sixty-nine percent of CNMs who used herbal preparations to stimulate labor learned about using them from other CNMs, 4% from formal research publications, and none from their formal education programs. Although 78% of the CNMs who used herbal preparations to stimulate labor directly prescribed them and 70% indirectly suggested them to clients, only 22% had included them within their written practice protocols. Seventy-five percent of the CNMs who used herbal preparations to stimulate labor used them first or instead of pitocin. Twenty-one percent reported complications including precipitous labor, tetanic uterine contractions, nausea, and vomiting. Sixty-four percent of the nurse-midwifery education programs included instruction in the use of herbal preparations to stimulate labor in their formal curricula, and 92% included informal discussions on the use of herbal preparations. Evening primrose oil was the most common herbal preparation discussed in nurse-midwifery education programs. Castor oil was the most commonly used herbal preparation used by nurse-midwives in clinical practice.
为记录认证助产士(CNM)和助产士教育项目使用草药制剂促进宫颈成熟、引产及增强宫缩的情况,对美国助产士学院的500名成员进行了一项全国性调查。还对48个助产士教育项目进行了调查,以确定它们是否在正式或非正式地教授学生使用草药制剂促进宫颈成熟、引产或增强宫缩。本文介绍了这项研究的结果、文献综述、专业问题及临床实践建议。在寄给美国助产士学院成员的500份问卷中,90份由使用草药制剂引产的CNM寄回,82份由未使用草药制剂引产的CNM寄回。由于数据不完整或问卷空白,排除了3份问卷。在使用和未使用替代方法引产的CNM受访者之间,在地理区域、助产士教育或最高学历方面未发现显著差异。在使用草药制剂引产的CNM中,64%使用蓝升麻,45%使用黑升麻,63%使用红树莓叶,93%使用蓖麻油,60%使用月见草油。与从未使用草药制剂引产的CNM相比,使用草药制剂引产的CNM年龄更小(43岁对45岁,P<.01),更有可能在家中或医院内或院外分娩中心分娩(P<.0006)。使用草药制剂引产最常被提及的原因是它们“天然”,而不使用草药制剂最常见的原因是缺乏对这些物质安全性的研究或经验。69%使用草药制剂引产的CNM是从其他CNM那里了解到使用方法的,4%从正式研究出版物中了解到,没有一个是从他们的正规教育项目中了解到的。尽管78%使用草药制剂引产的CNM直接开了这些药,70%间接向客户推荐,但只有22%将其纳入了书面实践方案。75%使用草药制剂引产的CNM首先使用或替代了缩宫素。21%报告了并发症,包括急产、强直性子宫收缩、恶心和呕吐。64%的助产士教育项目在其正式课程中包括了使用草药制剂引产的教学内容,92%包括了关于使用草药制剂的非正式讨论。月见草油是助产士教育项目中讨论最多的草药制剂。蓖麻油是助产士在临床实践中最常用的草药制剂。