Suppr超能文献

非药物干预分娩疼痛管理的疗效和安全性:系统评价和贝叶斯网络荟萃分析。

Efficacy and safety of non-pharmacological interventions for labour pain management: A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

机构信息

School of Nursing, Peking University, Beijing, China.

School of Nursing, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.

出版信息

J Clin Nurs. 2021 Dec;30(23-24):3398-3414. doi: 10.1111/jocn.15865. Epub 2021 Jun 1.

Abstract

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To compare and rank the efficacy and safety of non-pharmacological interventions in the management of labour pain.

BACKGROUND

Recently, various non-pharmacological interventions have been applied to manage labour pain and have shown positive effects. However, evidence identifying which type of non-pharmacological intervention is more efficient and safer is limited.

DESIGN

Systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis based on PRISMA-NMA.

METHODS

Seven databases were searched from database inception-March 2020. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, quality appraisal and data extraction. Conventional meta-analysis was conducted using either fixed-effects model or random-effects model according to statistical heterogeneity. The Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted using the consistency model.

RESULTS

43 studies involving nine non-pharmacological interventions were included. The Bayesian network meta-analysis showed that acupressure (SMD = -2.00, 95% CrI -3.09 to -0.94), aromatherapy (SMD = -2.01, 95% CrI -3.70 to -0.35) and massage therapy (SMD = -1.26, 95% CrI -2.26 to -0.30) had significant positive effects on alleviating labour pain, with aromatherapy being the most effective. The results also revealed that yoga (SMD = -130.85, 95% CrI -212.01 to -59.32) and acupressure (SMD = -10.14, 95% CrI -20.24 to -0.41) were the most effective interventions for shortening the first stage and the second stage of labour, respectively. There were no significant differences between non-pharmacological interventions and usual care or placebo control on the use of pharmacological methods and neonatal 5-min Apgar score.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence in this network meta-analysis illustrates that non-pharmacological interventions are effective and safe for labour pain management in low-risk pregnant women. In the future, well-designed studies are needed to validate the conclusion of this network meta-analysis.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The results support the use of non-pharmacological interventions, especially aromatherapy and acupressure, to relieve labour pain in low-risk pregnant women. Non-pharmacological interventions for labour pain management are recommended to apply according to maternal women's preference and values.

摘要

目的和目标

比较和评估非药物干预措施在分娩疼痛管理中的疗效和安全性。

背景

最近,各种非药物干预措施已被应用于分娩疼痛的管理,并显示出积极的效果。然而,确定哪种类型的非药物干预措施更有效和更安全的证据有限。

设计

基于 PRISMA-NMA 的系统评价和贝叶斯网络荟萃分析。

方法

从数据库建立到 2020 年 3 月,对 7 个数据库进行了检索。两位审查员独立进行了研究选择、质量评估和数据提取。根据统计异质性,采用固定效应模型或随机效应模型进行常规荟萃分析。采用一致性模型进行贝叶斯网络荟萃分析。

结果

纳入 43 项研究,涉及 9 种非药物干预措施。贝叶斯网络荟萃分析显示,穴位按压(SMD=-2.00,95%CrI-3.09 至-0.94)、芳香疗法(SMD=-2.01,95%CrI-3.70 至-0.35)和按摩疗法(SMD=-1.26,95%CrI-2.26 至-0.30)对缓解分娩疼痛有显著的积极影响,其中芳香疗法最有效。结果还显示,瑜伽(SMD=-130.85,95%CrI-212.01 至-59.32)和穴位按压(SMD=-10.14,95%CrI-20.24 至-0.41)分别是缩短第一产程和第二产程最有效的干预措施。非药物干预措施与常规护理或安慰剂对照在药物使用和新生儿 5 分钟 Apgar 评分方面无显著差异。

结论

本网络荟萃分析的证据表明,非药物干预措施对低危孕妇分娩疼痛的管理是有效和安全的。未来需要设计良好的研究来验证本网络荟萃分析的结论。

临床相关性

该网络荟萃分析的结果支持在低危孕妇中使用非药物干预措施,特别是芳香疗法和穴位按压来缓解分娩疼痛。建议根据产妇的偏好和价值观应用非药物干预措施来管理分娩疼痛。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验