4.3 Article

A Review of Evidence-Based Practices for Management of the Second Stage of Labor

期刊

JOURNAL OF MIDWIFERY & WOMENS HEALTH
卷 59, 期 3, 页码 264-276

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jmwh.12199

关键词

birth; childbirth; review; second stage labor

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Management of the second stage of labor often follows tradition-based routines rather than evidence-based practices. This review of second-stage labor care practices discusses risk factors for perineal trauma and prolonged second stage and scrutinizes a variety of care practices including positions, styles of pushing, use of epidural analgesia, and perineal support techniques. Current evidence for management of the second stage of labor supports the practices of delayed pushing, spontaneous (nondirected) pushing, and maternal choice of positions. Perineal compresses, perineal massage with a lubricant, and controlling the rate of fetal extension during crowning may prevent severe perineal trauma at birth. Supine positioning is not recommended. Upright positions and directed pushing can shorten the time from onset of second stage to birth and may be indicated in certain situations, although directed pushing has some associated risks. If the fetus is in the occiput posterior position, immediate pushing is not recommended, and manual rotation can be effective in correcting the malposition. Women should be informed of the potential effects of epidural analgesia on labor progress. Consultation and intervention to expedite birth may be indicated when birth is not imminent after 2 hours of active pushing, or 4 hours complete dilatation, for nulliparous women; or one hour of pushing, or 2 hours complete dilatation, for multiparous women. Each woman should be individually assessed and apprised of the potential risks to her and her fetus of a prolonged second stage of labor, and some women may choose to continue pushing beyond these time limits. (C) 2014 by the American College of Nurse-Midwives.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据