Lorentzen Iben Prentow, Andersen Charlotte S, Jensen Henriette Svenstrup, Fogsgaard Ann, Foureur Maralyn, Lauszus Finn Friis, Nohr Ellen Aagaard
Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Gl. Landevej 61, 7400, Herning, Denmark.
Nursing and Midwifery Research Centre, Hunter New England Health and University of Newcastle, NSW, 2300, Australia.
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X. 2021 Mar 13;10:100125. doi: 10.1016/j.eurox.2021.100125. eCollection 2021 Apr.
In the last decade, there has been an increased interest in exploring the impact of the physical birth environment on midwifery practice and women's birth experiences. This study is based on the hypothesis that the environment for birth needs greater attention to improve some of the existing challenges in modern obstetric practice, for example the increasing use of augmentation and number of interventions during delivery.
A randomized controlled trial was carried out to study the effect of giving birth in a specially designed "birth environment room" on the use of augmentation during labor. The study took place at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Herning Hospital, Denmark and included 680 nulliparous women in spontaneous labor at term with a fetus in cephalic presentation. Women were randomly allocated to either the "birth environment room" or a standard birth room. The primary outcome was augmentation of labor by use of oxytocin. Secondary outcomes were duration of labor, use of pharmacological pain relief, and mode of birth. Differences were estimated as relative risks (RR) and presented with 95% confidence intervals.
No difference was found on the primary outcome, augmentation of labor (29.1% in the "birth environment room" versus 30.6% in the standard room, RR 0.97; 0.89-1.08). More women in the "birth environment room" used the bathtub (60.6% versus 52.4%, RR 1.18; 1.02-1.37), whereas a tendency to lower use of epidural analgesia (22.6% versus 28.2%) did not reach statistical significance (RR 0.87; 0.74-1.02). The chance of an uncomplicated birth was almost similar in the two groups (70.6% in the "birth environment room" versus 72.6% in the standard room, RR 0.97; 0.88-1.07) as were duration of labor (mean 7.9 hours in both groups).
Birthing in a specially designed physical birth environment did not lower use of oxytocin for augmentation of labor. Neither did it have any effect on duration of labor, use of pharmacological pain relief, and chance of birthing without complications. We recommend that future trials are conducted in birth units with greater improvement potentials.
在过去十年中,人们对探索自然分娩环境对助产实践和女性分娩体验的影响越来越感兴趣。本研究基于这样一种假设,即分娩环境需要更多关注,以改善现代产科实践中现有的一些挑战,例如分娩期间催产素使用的增加和干预措施的数量。
进行了一项随机对照试验,以研究在专门设计的“分娩环境室”分娩对分娩期间催产素使用的影响。该研究在丹麦海宁医院妇产科进行,纳入了680名单胎头位足月自然分娩的初产妇。将妇女随机分配到“分娩环境室”或标准分娩室。主要结局是使用催产素加强宫缩。次要结局包括产程、药物镇痛的使用和分娩方式。差异以相对风险(RR)估计,并给出95%置信区间。
在主要结局即加强宫缩方面未发现差异(“分娩环境室”为29.1%,标准室为30.6%,RR 0.97;0.89 - 1.08)。“分娩环境室”中有更多女性使用浴缸(60.6%对52.4%,RR 1.18;1.02 - 1.37),而硬膜外镇痛使用倾向较低(22.6%对28.2%)未达到统计学意义(RR 0.87;0.74 - 1.02)。两组顺产的几率几乎相似(“分娩环境室”为70.6%,标准室为72.6%,RR 0.97;0.88 - 1.07),产程也相似(两组平均均为7.9小时)。
在专门设计的自然分娩环境中分娩并未降低催产素用于加强宫缩的使用率。它对产程、药物镇痛的使用以及无并发症分娩的几率也没有任何影响。我们建议未来在具有更大改善潜力的分娩单元进行试验。