13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

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

      Journal of Midwifery & Women's Health
      Wiley-Blackwell

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          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.

          Related collections

          Most cited references55

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Contemporary patterns of spontaneous labor with normal neonatal outcomes.

          To use contemporary labor data to examine the labor patterns in a large, modern obstetric population in the United States. Data were from the Consortium on Safe Labor, a multicenter retrospective study that abstracted detailed labor and delivery information from electronic medical records in 19 hospitals across the United States. A total of 62,415 parturients were selected who had a singleton term gestation, spontaneous onset of labor, vertex presentation, vaginal delivery, and a normal perinatal outcome. A repeated-measures analysis was used to construct average labor curves by parity. An interval-censored regression was used to estimate duration of labor, stratified by cervical dilation at admission and centimeter by centimeter. Labor may take more than 6 hours to progress from 4 to 5 cm and more than 3 hours to progress from 5 to 6 cm of dilation. Nulliparous and multiparous women appeared to progress at a similar pace before 6 cm. However, after 6 cm, labor accelerated much faster in multiparous than in nulliparous women. The 95 percentiles of the second stage of labor in nulliparous women with and without epidural analgesia were 3.6 and 2.8 hours, respectively. A partogram for nulliparous women is proposed. In a large, contemporary population, the rate of cervical dilation accelerated after 6 cm, and progress from 4 cm to 6 cm was far slower than previously described. Allowing labor to continue for a longer period before 6 cm of cervical dilation may reduce the rate of intrapartum and subsequent repeat cesarean deliveries in the United States.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            ACOG Practice Bulletin Number 49, December 2003: Dystocia and augmentation of labor.

            (2003)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A multicenter interventional program to reduce the incidence of anal sphincter tears.

              In Norway, we have experienced a gradual increase in the incidence of obstetric anal sphincter injuries from under 1% in the late 1960s to 4.3% in 2004. This study was aimed to assess whether an interventional program causes a decrease in the frequency of anal sphincter tears. In all, 40,152 vaginal deliveries between 2003 and 2009 were enrolled in the interventional cohort study from four Norwegian obstetric departments. The focus of the intervention was on manual assistance during the final part of the second stage of labor. Data were analyzed in relation to occurrence of obstetric anal sphincter tears. The proportion of parturients with anal sphincter tears decreased from 4-5% to 1-2% during the study period in all four hospitals (P<.001). The tears associated with both noninstrumental and instrumental deliveries decreased dramatically. The number of patients with grades 3 and 4 anal sphincter ruptures decreased significantly, and the reduction was most pronounced in grade 4 tears (-63.5%) and least in 3c tears (-47.5%) (both P<.001). The number of episiotomies increased in two hospitals but remained unchanged in the other two. The lowest proportion of tears at the end of the intervention (1.2% and 1.3%, respectively) was found in the two hospitals with an unchanged episiotomy rate. The multicenter intervention caused a highly significant decrease in obstetric anal sphincter injuries. II.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of Midwifery & Women's Health
                Journal of Midwifery & Women's Health
                Wiley-Blackwell
                15269523
                May 2014
                May 2014
                : 59
                : 3
                : 264-276
                Article
                10.1111/jmwh.12199
                24850283
                64f9d40a-39cc-424f-9716-d8594a1c44bf
                © 2014

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article