Rex Healthcare, Raleigh, NC, USA.
MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs. 2010 Mar-Apr;35(2):81-8. doi: 10.1097/NMC.0b013e3181cae7ad.
PURPOSE: Comparison of two different methods for management of second stage of labor: immediate pushing at complete cervical dilation of 10 cm and delayed pushing 90 minutes after complete cervical dilation. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This study was a randomized clinical trial in a labor and delivery unit of a not-for-profit community hospital. A sample of 44 nulliparous mothers with continuous epidural anesthesia were studied after random assignment to treatment groups. Subjects were managed with either immediate or delayed pushing during the second stage of labor at the time cervical dilation was complete. The primary outcome measure was the length of pushing during second stage of labor. Secondary outcomes included length of second stage of labor, maternal fatigue and perineal injuries, and fetal heart rate decelerations. Two-tailed, unpaired Student's t-tests and Chi-square analysis were used for data analysis. Level of significance was set at p < .01 following a Bonferroni correction for multiple t-tests. RESULTS: A total of 44 subjects received the study intervention (N = 28 immediate pushing; N = 16 delayed pushing). The delayed pushing group had significantly shorter amount of time spent in pushing compared with the immediate pushing group (38.9 +/- 6.9 vs. 78.7 +/- 7.9 minutes, respectively, p = .002). Maternal fatigue scores, perineal injuries, and fetal heart rate decelerations were similar for both groups. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Delaying pushing for up to 90 minutes after complete cervical dilation resulted in a significant decrease in the time mothers spent pushing without a significant increase in total time in second stage of labor.In clinical practice, healthcare providers sometimes resist delaying the onset of pushing after second stage of labor has begun because of a belief it will increase labor time. This study's finding of a 51% reduction in pushing time when mothers delay pushing for up to 90 minutes, with no significant increase in overall time for second stage of labor, disputes that concern.
目的:比较第二产程中两种不同管理方法的效果:宫颈完全扩张至 10cm 时立即用力与宫颈完全扩张 90 分钟后再用力。
研究设计与方法:这是一项在一家非营利性社区医院的产房进行的随机临床试验。将 44 名接受持续硬膜外麻醉的初产妇随机分配到治疗组。当宫颈完全扩张时,产妇被分为立即用力组或第二产程 90 分钟后再用力组。主要观察指标为第二产程的用力时间。次要观察指标包括第二产程时间、产妇疲劳和会阴损伤以及胎儿心率减速情况。采用双尾、非配对 Student's t 检验和卡方分析进行数据分析。采用 Bonferroni 校正多重 t 检验,p<0.01 时差异有统计学意义。
结果:共有 44 名产妇接受了研究干预(立即用力组 28 名,延迟用力组 16 名)。与立即用力组相比,延迟用力组用力时间明显缩短(分别为 38.9±6.9 分钟和 78.7±7.9 分钟,p=0.002)。两组产妇的疲劳评分、会阴损伤和胎儿心率减速情况相似。
临床意义:宫颈完全扩张后,延迟 90 分钟开始用力可显著减少产妇用力时间,而第二产程总时间无明显增加。在临床实践中,医护人员有时会反对在第二产程开始后延迟开始用力,因为他们认为这会增加产程时间。本研究发现,产妇延迟用力 90 分钟,可使用力时间减少 51%,而第二产程总时间无明显增加,这反驳了上述担忧。
MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs. 2010
J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2010
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006-1
MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs. 2008
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-3-26
Am J Perinatol. 2012-12-3