| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Järnbert-Pettersson, Hans, et al.
(författare)
-
Labour pain - poorly analysed and reported : a systematic review
- 2018
-
Ingår i: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1471-2393 .- 1471-2393. ; 18:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Modelling and analysing repeated measures data, such as women's experiences of pain during labour, is a complex topic. Traditional end-point analyses such as t-tests, ANOVA, or repeated measures [rANOVA] have known disadvantages. Modern and more sophisticated statistical methods such as mixed effect models provide flexibility and are more likely to draw correct conclusions from data. The aim of this study is to study how labour pain is analysed in repeated measures design studies, and to increase awareness of when and why modern statistical methods are suitable with the aim of encouraging their use in preference of traditional methods.METHODS: Six databases were searched with the English language as a restriction. Study eligibility criteria included: Original studies published between 1999 and 2016, studying pregnant women in labour with the aim to compare at least two methods for labour pain management, with at least two measurements of labour pain separated by time, and where labour pain was analysed. After deduplication, all records (n = 2800) were screened by one of the authors who excluded ineligible publication types, leaving 737 records remaining for full-text screening. A sample of 309 studies was then randomly selected and screened by both authors.RESULTS: Among the 133 (of 309) studies that fulfilled the study eligibility criteria, 7% used mixed effect models, 20% rANOVA, and 73% used end-point analysis to draw conclusions regarding treatment effects for labour pain between groups. The most commonly used end-point analyses to compare groups regarding labour pain were t-tests (57, 43%) and ANOVA (41, 31%). We present a checklist for clinicians to clarify when mixed effect models should be considered as the preferred choice for analysis, in particular when labour pain is measured.CONCLUSIONS: Studies that aim to compare methods for labour pain management often use inappropriate statistical methods, and inaccurately report how the statistical analyses were carried out. The statistical methods used in analyses are often based on assumptions that are not fulfilled or described. We recommend that authors, reviewers, and editors pay greater attention to the analysis when designing and publishing studies evaluating methods for pain relief during labour.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Vixner, Linda
(författare)
-
Acupuncture for labour pain
- 2015
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Background: Acupuncture involves puncturing the skin with thin sterile needles at defined acupuncture points. Previous studies are inconclusive regarding the effect of acupuncture on labour pain, but some studies have found a reduction in the use of pharmacological pain relief when acupuncture is administered. The appropriate dose of acupuncture treatment required to elicit a potential effect on labour pain has not been fully explored. The dose is determined by many different factors, including the number of needles used and the intensity of the stimulation. In Sweden, manual stimulation of the needles is common practice when acupuncture is used for labour pain, but electrical stimulation of the needles, which gives a higher dose, could possibly be more effective. The overall aim of this thesis was to evaluate the effectiveness of acupuncture with manual stimulation (MA) of the needles as well as acupuncture with a combination of manual and electrical stimulation (EA) in reducing labour pain, compared with standard care without any form of acupuncture (SC).Methods: The study was designed as a three-armed randomised controlled trial in which 303 nulliparous women with normal pregnancies were randomised to MA, EA, or SC. The primary outcome was labour pain, assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Secondary outcomes were relaxation during labour, use of obstetric pain relief, and associations between maternal characteristics and labour pain and use of epidural analgesia respectively. Also, labour and infant outcomes, recollection of labour pain, and maternal experiences, such as birth experience and experience of the midwife, were investigated two months after the birth. The sample size calculation was based on the potential to discover a difference of 15 mm on the VAS. Data were collected during labour before the interventions, the day after birth, and two months later. Besides using the VAS, information was collected by means of study specific protocol, questionnaires and medical records.Results: The mean VAS scores were 66.4 in the MA group, 68.5 in the EA group, and 69.0 in the SC group (mean differences: MA vs. SC 2.6 95% CI -1.7 to 6.9, and EA vs. SC 0.6 95% CI -3.6 to 4.8). Other methods of pain relief were used less frequently in the EA group, including epidural analgesia, MA 61.4%, EA 46%, and SC 69.9%. (EA vs. SC OR 0.4 95% CI 0.2 to 0.7). No statistically significant differences were found in the recollection of labour pain between the three groups two months after birth (mean VAS score: MA 69.3, EA 68.7 and SC 70.1). A few maternal characteristics were associated with labour pain (age, dysmenorrhea, and cervix dilatation), but none of the investigated characteristics predicted the outcome of the acupuncture treatment in MA or EA. Women in the EA group experienced acupuncture as being effective for labour pain to a higher extent than women who received MA, MA 44.4%, EA 67.1% (EA vs. MA OR 2.4 95% CI 1.2 to 4.8). Women in the EA group also spent less time in labour (mean 500 min) than those who received MA (mean 619 min) and SC (mean 615 min) (EA vs. MA HR 1.4 95% CI 1.0 to1.9, EA vs. SC HR 1.4, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.0), and had less blood loss than women receiving SC, (EA vs. SC OR 0.1 95% CI 0.3 to 0.7). The women’s assessment of the midwife as being supportive during labour (MA 77.2%, EA 83.5%, SC 80%), overall satisfaction with midwife care (MA 100%, EA 97.5%, SC 98.7%), and having an overall positive childbirth experience (MA 64.6%, EA 61.0%, SC 54.3%) did not differ statistically. No serious side effects of the acupuncture treatment were reported.Conclusion: Acupuncture, regardless of type of stimulation, did not differ from standard care without acupuncture in terms of reducing women’s experience of pain during labour, or their memory of pain and childbirth overall two months after the birth. However, other forms of obstetric pain relief were less frequent in women receiving a combination of manual and electrical stimulation, suggesting that this method could facilitate coping with labour pain.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Vixner, Linda, et al.
(författare)
-
Associations between maternal characteristics and women’s responses to acupuncture during labour: a secondary analysis from a randomised controlled trial
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Acupuncture in Medicine. - : SAGE Publications. - 0964-5284 .- 1759-9873. ; 35:3, s. 180-188
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Patient characteristics are modulators of pain experience after acupuncture treatment for chronic pain. Whether this also applies to labour pain is unknown.Aim To examine for associations between maternal characteristics and response to acupuncture in terms of labour pain intensity in close proximity to the treatment (within 60 min) and over a longer time period (up to 240 min), and whether or not epidural analgesia is used, before and after adjustment for obstetric status upon admission to the labour ward.Methods Cohort study (n=253) using data collected for a randomised controlled trial. Associations were examined using linear mixed models and logistic regression analyses. Tests of interactions were also applied to investigate whether maternal characteristics were influenced by treatment group allocation.Results In close proximity to the treatment, advanced age and cervical dilation were associated with lower pain scores (mean difference (MD) −13.2, 95% CI −23.4 to −2.9; and MD −5.0, 95% CI −9.6 to −0.5, respectively). For the longer time period, labour pain was negatively associated with age (MD −11.8, 95% CI −19.6 to −3.9) and positively associated with dysmenorrhoea (MD 5.5, 95% CI 1.6 to 9.5). Previous acupuncture experience and advanced cervical dilatation were associated with higher and lower use of epidural analgesia (OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.3 to 5.9; and OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1 to 0.5, respectively). No interactions with treatment allocation were found.Conclusions This study did not identify any maternal characteristics associated with women's responses to acupuncture during labour.Trial registration number NCT01197950; Post-results.
|
|
| 9. |
- Waldenström, U, et al.
(författare)
-
Advanced maternal age increases the risk of very preterm birth, irrespective of parity : a population-based register study
- 2017
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. - : Wiley. - 1470-0328 .- 1471-0528. ; 124:8, s. 1235-1244
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether advanced maternal age is associated with preterm birth, irrespective of parity.DESIGN: Population-based registry study.SETTING: Swedish Medical Birth Register.POPULATION: First, second, and third live singleton births to women aged 20 years or older in Sweden, from 1990 to 2011 (n = 2 009 068).METHODS: Logistic regression analysis was used in each parity group to estimate risks of very and moderately preterm births to women at 20-24, 25-29, 30-34, 35-39, and 40 years or older, using 25-29 years as the reference group. Odds ratios (ORs) were adjusted for year of birth, education, country of birth, smoking, body mass index, and history of preterm birth. Age-related risks of spontaneous and medically indicated preterm births were also investigated.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Very preterm (22-31 weeks of gestation) and moderately preterm (32-36 weeks) births.RESULTS: Risks of very preterm birth increased with maternal age, irrespective of parity: adjusted ORs in first, second, and third births ranged from 1.18 to 1.28 at 30-34 years, from 1.59 to 1.70 at 35-39 years, and from 1.97 to 2.40 at ≥40 years. In moderately preterm births, age-related associations were weaker, but were statistically significant from 35-39 years in all parity groups. Advanced maternal age increased the risks of both spontaneous and medically indicated preterm births.CONCLUSIONS: Advanced maternal age is associated with an increased risk of preterm birth, irrespective of parity, especially very preterm birth. Women aged 35 years and older, expecting their first, second, or third births, should be regarded as a risk group for very preterm birth.
|
|
