Routine prophylactic drugs in normal labour for reducing gastric aspiration and its effects

Exploring women's personal experiences of giving birth in Gonabad city: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Women's health is an important task in society. The aim of this qualitative study that used a phenomenological approach was to explain women's personal experiences of giving birth in Gonabad city that had positive experiences of giving birth in order to establish quality cares and the related factors of midwifery cares for this physiological phenomenon.

METHODS

The participants were 21 primiparae women who gave a normal and or uncomplicated giving birth in the hospital of Gonabad University of medical sciences. Based on a purposeful approach in-depth interviews were continued to reach data saturation. The data were collected through open and semi-structured interactional in-depth interviews with all the participants. All the interviews were taped, transcribed and then analyzed through a qualitative content analysis method to identify the concepts and themes.

FINDINGS

Some categories were emerged. A quiet and safe environment was the most urgent need of the most women giving birth. Unnecessary routine interventions that are performed on all women regardless of their needs and should be avoided were considered such as: "absolute rest, establishing vein, frequent vaginal examinations, fasting and early Amniotomy". All the women wanted to take part actively in their giving birth, because they believed it could affect their giving birth.

CONCLUSION

We hope that the women's experiences of giving birth will be a pleasant and enjoyable experience for all the mothers giving birth.

Interventions at caesarean section for reducing the risk of aspiration pneumonitis

BACKGROUND

Aspiration pneumonitis is a syndrome resulting from the inhalation of gastric contents. The incidence in obstetric anaesthesia has fallen, largely due to improved anaesthetic techniques and the increased use of regional anaesthesia at caesarean section. However, aspiration pneumonitis is still a cause of maternal morbidity and mortality, and it is important to use effective prophylaxis.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether interventions given prior to caesarean section reduce the risk of aspiration pneumonitis in women with an uncomplicated pregnancy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 April 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials were included. Quasi-randomised trials were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. Data entry was checked. Fixed-effect meta-analysis was used to combine data where it was reasonable to assume that studies were estimating the same underlying treatment effect. If substantial clinical or statistical heterogeneity was detected, we used random-effects analysis to produce an overall summary.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-two studies were included in this review. However, only 22 studies, involving 2658 women, provided data for analysis. All the women in the included studies had a caesarean section under general anaesthesia. The studies covered a number of comparisons, but were mostly small and of unclear or poor quality.When compared with no treatment or placebo, there was a significant reduction in the risk of intragastric pH < 2.5 with antacids (risk ratio (RR) 0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09 to 0.32, two studies, 108 women), H2 antagonists (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.18, two studies, 170 women) and proton pump antagonists (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.46, one study 80 women). H2 antagonists were associated with a reduced the risk of intragastric pH < 2.5 at intubation when compared with proton pump antagonists (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.97, one study, 120 women), but compared with antacids the findings were unclear. The combined use of 'antacids plus H2 antagonists' was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of intragastric pH < 2.5 at intubation when compared with placebo (RR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.15, one study, 89 women) or compared with antacids alone (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.92, one study, 119 women).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The quality of the evidence was poor, but the findings suggest that the combination of antacids plus H2 antagonists was more effective than no intervention, and superior to antacids alone in preventing low gastric pH. However, none of the studies assessed potential adverse effects or substantive clinical outcomes. These findings are relevant for all women undergoing caesarean section under general anaesthesia.

The effects of oral fluid intake an hour before cesarean section on regurgitation incidence

BACKGROUND

The fear of aspiration of gastric contents and its life-threatening disadvantages in patients have encouraged many medical practitioners to follow conservative policies for clear fluid/liquid and solid intake from midnight to the time of surgery. These policies have been pursued more severely in case of pregnant women, leading the physicians to follow "nil per os" policy. The aim of this study was to determine and compare the incidence of regurgitation in two groups of pregnant women during general anesthesia for cesarean section, with standard fasting policy and taking clear fluid an hour prior to the induction of anesthesia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This clinical trial was conducted for a period of 21 months in Nik-Nafs Maternity Hospital of Rafsanjan. The pregnant women who were candidates for elective cesarean section were registered for the study. All women fasted from midnight, and then were randomly assigned to one of the two groups. Those in the case group received 150 ml of clear liquid containing 10% carbohydrate about an hour before the induction of anesthesia. The occurrence of regurgitation was assessed by inserting the turnsole paper into the pharynx. Finally, the data of 411 cases were analyzed by descriptive methods.

RESULTS

There was one case of regurgitation (0.69%) in the control group and one case (0.36%) in the case group, and no case of aspiration.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no evidence to suggest that taking clear fluids about 1 hr before cesarean section will increase the risk of regurgitation. It confirms the safety of following more flexible fasting policies preoperatively, in addition to oral fluid intake, in case of parturients.

Restricting oral fluid and food intake during labour

BACKGROUND

Restricting fluids and foods during labour is common practice across many birth settings with some women only being allowed sips of water or ice chips. Restriction of oral intake may be unpleasant for some women, and may adversely influence their experience of labour.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the benefits and harms of oral fluid or food restriction during labour.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 June 2013) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs of restricting fluids and food for women in labour compared with women free to eat and drink.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 19 studies of which we included five, involving 3130 women. We excluded eight studies, one awaits classification and five are ongoing studies. All the included studies looked at women in active labour and at low risk of potentially requiring a general anaesthetic. One study looked at complete restriction versus giving women the freedom to eat and drink at will; two studies looked at water only versus giving women specific fluids and foods and two studies looked at water only versus giving women carbohydrate drinks.When comparing any restriction of fluids and food versus women given some nutrition in labour, the meta-analysis was dominated by one study undertaken in a highly medicalised environment. There were no statistically significant differences identified in: caesarean section (average risk ratio (RR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63 to 1.25, five studies, 3103 women), operative vaginal births (average RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.10, five studies, 3103 women) and Apgar scores less than seven at five minutes (average RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.77 to 2.68, four studies, 2902 infants), nor in any of the other outcomes assessed. Women's views were not assessed. The pooled data were insufficient to assess the incidence of Mendelson's syndrome, an extremely rare outcome. Other comparisons showed similar findings, except one study did report a significant increase in caesarean sections for women taking carbohydrate drinks in labour compared with water only, but these results should be interpreted with caution as the sample size was small.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Since the evidence shows no benefits or harms, there is no justification for the restriction of fluids and food in labour for women at low risk of complications. No studies looked specifically at women at increased risk of complications, hence there is no evidence to support restrictions in this group of women. Conflicting evidence on carbohydrate solutions means further studies are needed and it is critical in any future studies to assess women's views.

Effect of oral carbohydrate intake on labor progress: randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Lack of information regarding biochemical changes in women during labor and its outcomes on maternal and neonatal health still is an unanswered question. This study aims to explore the effectiveness of oral carbohydrate intake during labor on the duration of the active phase and other maternal and neonatal outcomes.

METHODS

A parallel prospective randomized controlled trial, conducted at the University Affiliated Teaching Hospital in Gonabad. Totally, 190 women were randomly assigned to an intervention (N=87) or control (N=90) group. Inclusion criteria were low-risk women with singleton cephalic presentation; and cervical dilatation 3-4 cm. Randomization was used by random number generator on every day. Odd numbers was used for intervention and even numbers for control group. Intervention was based on the preferences between: 3 medium dates plus 110 ml water; 3 dates plus 110 ml light tea without sugar; or 110 ml orange juice. The protocol is only run once but women ate and drank gradually before second stage of labor. Control group were fasted as routine practice. Neither participants nor care givers or staff could be blinded to group allocation. Differences between duration of the active phase of labor were assessed as primary outcome measure.

RESULTS

There was significant difference in the length of second stage of labor (P <.05). The effect size for this variable was 0.48. There were no significant differences in other maternal and neonatal outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral intake of carbohydrate was an effective method for shortening the duration of second stage of labor in low-risk women.

Restricting oral fluid and food intake during labour

BACKGROUND

Restricting fluids and foods during labour is common practice across many birth settings with some women only being allowed sips of water or ice chips. Restriction of oral intake may be unpleasant for some women, and may adversely influence their experience of labour.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the benefits and harms of oral fluid or food restriction during labour.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (April 2009).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs of restricting fluids and food for women in labour compared with women free to eat and drink.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five studies (3130 women). All studies looked at women in active labour and at low risk of potentially requiring a general anaesthetic. One study looked at complete restriction versus giving women the freedom to eat and drink at will; two studies looked at water only versus giving women specific fluids and foods and two studies looked at water only versus giving women carbohydrate drinks.When comparing any restriction of fluids and food versus women given some nutrition in labour, the meta-analysis was dominated by one study undertaken in a highly medicalised environment. There were no statistically significant differences identified in: caesarean section (average risk ratio (RR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63 to 1.25, five studies, 3103 women), operative vaginal births (average RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.10, five studies, 3103 women) and Apgar scores less than seven at five minutes (average RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.77 to 2.68, three studies, 2574 infants), nor in any of the other outcomes assessed. Women's views were not assessed. The pooled data were insufficient to assess the incidence of Mendelson's syndrome, an extremely rare outcome. Other comparisons showed similar findings, except one study did report a significant increase in caesarean sections for women taking carbohydrate drinks in labour compared with water only, but these results should be interpreted with caution as the sample size was small.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Since the evidence shows no benefits or harms, there is no justification for the restriction of fluids and food in labour for women at low risk of complications. No studies looked specifically at women at increased risk of complications, hence there is no evidence to support restrictions in this group of women. Conflicting evidence on carbohydrate solutions means further studies are needed and it is critical in any future studies to assess women's views.

Interventions at caesarean section for reducing the risk of aspiration pneumonitis

BACKGROUND

Aspiration pneumonitis is a syndrome resulting from the inhalation of gastric contents. The incidence in obstetric anaesthesia has fallen, largely due to improved anaesthetic techniques and the increased use of regional anaesthesia at caesarean section. However, aspiration pneumonitis is still a cause of maternal morbidity and mortality, and it is important to use effective prophylaxis.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether interventions given prior to caesarean section reduce the risk of aspiration pneumonitis in women with an uncomplicated pregnancy.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (April 2009).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials were included. Quasi-randomised trials were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. Data entry was checked.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-two studies, involving 2658 women, are included, all having a caesarean section under general anaesthesia. The studies covered a number of comparisons, but were mostly small and of unclear or poor quality.When compared to no treatment or placebo, there was a significant reduction in the risk of intragastric pH < 2.5 with antacids (risk ratio (RR) 0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09 to 0.32, two studies, 108 women), H(2) antagonists (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.18, two studies, 170 women) and proton pump antagonists (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.46, one study 80 women). H(2) antagonists were associated with a reduced the risk of intragastric pH < 2.5 at intubation when compared with proton pump antagonists (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.97, one study, 120 women), but compared with antacids the findings were unclear. The combined use of 'antacids plus H(2) antagonists' was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of intragastric pH < 2.5 at intubation when compared with placebo (RR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.15, one study, 89 women) or compared with antacids alone (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.92, one study, 119 women).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The quality of the evidence was poor, but the findings suggest that the combination of antacids plus H(2) antagonists was more effective than no intervention, and superior to antacids alone in preventing low gastric pH. However, none of the studies assessed potential adverse effects or substantive clinical outcomes. These findings are relevant for all women undergoing caesarean section under general anaesthesia.