Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2022 Oct;101(10):1153-1162. doi: 10.1111/aogs.14433. Epub 2022 Aug 7.
Primiparity and labor induction, especially when cervical ripening is required, are risk factors for a negative childbirth experience. Our aim was to compare childbirth experience in primiparous women with cervical ripening by balloon catheter or oral misoprostol using the validated Childbirth Experience Questionnaire (CEQ). We also wanted to compare assessment of a negative childbirth experience by visual analogue scale (VAS) and CEQ.
This is a prospective study of 362 primiparous women undergoing cervical ripening and labor induction by balloon catheter (67.4%) or oral misoprostol (32.6%) at Helsinki University Hospital, Finland, between January 1, 2019 and January 31, 2020. After delivery, the women assessed their childbirth experience using the CEQ, and patient records provided the patient characteristics, delivery outcomes and VAS ratings. We analyzed the results using IBM SPSS Statistics.
Overall, the women experienced their labor and delivery rather positively, with a mean CEQ score of 2.9 (SD 0.6) (scale 1-4), and no differences were detectable when comparing women with cervical ripening by balloon catheter or misoprostol. However, women with balloon catheter were more often satisfied with the method chosen for them and would choose the same method in a future pregnancy. Compared with CEQ, VAS seems mainly to reflect the women's perception of their own capacity to give birth and the safety of the hospital setting, not the level of professional support or participation in decision-making. According to our results, CEQ and VAS are comparable, but the usability of the CEQ is limited by its inability to distinguish the most negative and the most positive experiences, and the VAS is limited by its simplicity.
Women with cervical ripening by balloon catheter or oral misoprostol experienced their childbirth rather positively, results being similar in both groups. However, women with cervical ripening by balloon catheter were more content with their labor induction. The CEQ and VAS can both be used to assess the childbirth experience of primiparous women undergoing labor induction, but both methods have limitations.
初产妇和引产,特别是需要宫颈成熟时,是负面分娩体验的危险因素。我们的目的是使用经过验证的分娩体验问卷(CEQ)比较初产妇使用球囊导管或口服米索前列醇进行宫颈成熟时的分娩体验。我们还想比较使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)和 CEQ 评估负面分娩体验。
这是一项前瞻性研究,纳入了 2019 年 1 月 1 日至 2020 年 1 月 31 日期间在芬兰赫尔辛基大学医院接受球囊导管(67.4%)或口服米索前列醇(32.6%)宫颈成熟和引产的 362 名初产妇。分娩后,女性使用 CEQ 评估分娩体验,患者记录提供患者特征、分娩结局和 VAS 评分。我们使用 IBM SPSS Statistics 分析结果。
总体而言,女性对分娩过程的体验较为积极,CEQ 平均得分为 2.9(SD 0.6)(1-4 分制),使用球囊导管或米索前列醇进行宫颈成熟的女性之间无差异。然而,使用球囊导管的女性对为她们选择的方法更满意,并且在未来怀孕时会选择相同的方法。与 CEQ 相比,VAS 似乎主要反映了女性对自己分娩能力和医院环境安全性的感知,而不是专业支持或决策参与的水平。根据我们的结果,CEQ 和 VAS 是可比的,但 CEQ 的可用性受到其无法区分最负面和最积极体验的限制,而 VAS 的可用性受到其简单性的限制。
使用球囊导管或口服米索前列醇进行宫颈成熟的初产妇对分娩的体验较为积极,两组结果相似。然而,使用球囊导管进行宫颈成熟的女性对引产更满意。CEQ 和 VAS 均可用于评估接受引产的初产妇的分娩体验,但两种方法都有局限性。