Explore the vast range of titles available.

Despite today's historically low maternal and infant mortality rates in the United States, labor continues to evoke fear among American women. Rather than embrace the natural childbirth methods promoted in the 1970s, most women welcome epidural anesthesia and even Cesarean deliveries. In Deliver Me from Pain, Jacqueline H. Wolf asks how a treatment such as obstetric anesthesia, even when it historically posed serious risk to mothers and newborns, paradoxically came to assuage women's anxiety about birth. Each chapter begins with the story of a birth, dramatically illustrating the unique practices of the era being examined. Deliver Me from Pain covers the development and use of anesthesia from ether and chloroform in the mid-nineteenth century; to amnesiacs, barbiturates, narcotics, opioids, tranquilizers, saddle blocks, spinals, and gas during the mid-twentieth century; to epidural anesthesia today. Labor pain is not merely a physiological response, but a phenomenon that mothers and physicians perceive through a historical, social, and cultural lens. Wolf examines these influences and argues that medical and lay views of labor pain and the concomitant acceptance of obstetric anesthesia have had a ripple effect, creating the conditions for acceptance of other, often unnecessary, and sometimes risky obstetric treatments: forceps, the chemical induction and augmentation of labor, episiotomy, electronic fetal monitoring, and Cesarean section. As American women make decisions about anesthesia today, Deliver Me from Pain offers them insight into how women made this choice in the past and why each generation of mothers has made dramatically different decisions.

Objective To determine whether being upright in the second stage of labour in nulliparous women with a low dose epidural increases the chance of spontaneous vaginal birth compared with lying down.Design Multicentre pragmatic individually randomised controlled trial.Setting 41 UK hospital labour wards.Participants 3093 nulliparous women aged 16 or older, at term with a singleton cephalic presentation and in the second stage of labour with epidural analgesia.Interventions Women were allocated to an upright or lying down position, using a secure web based randomisation service, stratified by centre, with no masking of participants or clinicians to the trial interventions.Main outcome measures The primary outcome was spontaneous vaginal birth. Women were analysed in the groups into which they were randomly allocated, regardless of position recorded at any time during the second stage of labour (excluding women with no valid consent, who withdrew, or who did not reach second stage before delivery). Secondary outcomes included mode of birth, perineal trauma, infant Apgar score <4 at five minutes, admission to a neonatal unit, and longer term included maternal physical and psychological health, incontinence, and infant gross developmental delay. Results Between 4 October 2010 and 31 January 2014, 3236 women were randomised and 3093 (95.6%) included in the primary analysis (1556 in the upright group and 1537 in the lying down group). Significantly fewer spontaneous vaginal births occurred in women in the upright group: 35.2% (548/1556) compared with 41.1% (632/1537) in the lying down group (adjusted risk ratio 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.78 to 0.94). This represents a 5.9% absolute increase in the chance of spontaneous vaginal birth in the lying down group (number needed to treat 17, 95% confidence interval 11 to 40). No evidence of differences was found for most of the secondary maternal, neonatal, or longer term outcomes including instrumental vaginal delivery (adjusted risk ratio 1.08, 99% confidence interval 0.99 to 1.18), obstetric anal sphincter injury (1.27, 0.88 to 1.84), infant Apgar score <4 at five minutes (0.66, 0.06 to 6.88), and maternal faecal incontinence at one year (1.18, 0.61 to 2.28).Conclusions Evidence shows that lying down in the second stage of labour results in more spontaneous vaginal births in nulliparous women with epidural analgesia, with no apparent disadvantages in relation to short or longer term outcomes for mother or baby.Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN35706297.

Background In order to reduce the complications of perineal damage and the pain caused by it for the mother, this study was conducted to determine the effect of warm perineal compress on perineal trauma (1st-, 2nd-, 3rd-, and 4th-degree perineal tears), postpartum pain, intact perineum (primary outcomes), episiotomy, length of the second stage, and APGAR score at 1 and 5 min after childbirth (secondary outcome). Methods PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Google Scholar, Web of Science, SID, Magiran, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched to identify the relevant articles from inception to November 1, 2022, with language restriction (only English and Persian). A manual search was also performed. Risk of bias 2 (RoB2) and ROBIN-I were employed to evaluate the quality of the included papers. Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.3. Heterogeneity was assessed using I 2 . In cases with high heterogeneity, subgroup analysis was utilized based on the parity and ethnicity, and time of pain measurement after delivery also a random-effects model was used instead of a fixed-effects model. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed for the primary outcomes. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Results A total number of 228 articles were found in databases. Of these articles, eighty-six were screened by title, 27 by abstract, and 21 by full text. Finally, 14 articles were included, of which ten were RCT and four were non-RCT. Meta-analysis results revealed that warm perineal compress significantly reduced perineal pain (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.08–0.66; P = 0.0006), average pain (SMD − 0.73, 95% CI 1.23 to − 0.23; P = 0.004), second-degree perineal tear (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.54–0.79; P˂0.00001), third-degree perineal tear (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.15–0.67; P = 0.003), fourth-degree perineal tear (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01–0.87; P = 0.04), episiotomy (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.46–0.86; P = 0.004), and intact perineum significantly increased (RR 3.06, 95% CI 1.79–5.22; P < 0.0001) compared to the control group. However, there was no statistically significant difference in terms of first-degree tear (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.86–1.25; P = 0.72), length of the second stage of labor (MD − 0.60, 95% CI − 2.43 to 1.22; P = 0.52), the first minute (MD − 0.03, 95% CI − 0.07 to 0.02; P = 0.24) and the fifth minute Apgar score (MD − 0.02, 95% CI − 0.07 to 0.03; P = 0.46) between the two groups. Conclusion Warm perineal compress administered during the second stage of labor reduce postpartum pain, second and third-degree perineal tears, and episiotomy rate while it increases the incidence of intact perineum compared to the control group.

Introduction and Hypothesis The objective was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of an intrapartum electromechanical pelvic floor dilator designed to reduce the risk of levator ani muscle (LAM) avulsion during vaginal delivery. Methods A multicenter, randomized controlled trial enrolled nulliparous participants planning vaginal delivery. During the first stage of labor, participants were randomized to receive the intravaginal device or standard-of-care labor management. The primary effectiveness endpoint was the presence of full LAM avulsion on transperineal pelvic-floor ultrasound at 3 months. Three urogynecologists performed blinded interpretation of ultrasound images. The primary safety endpoint was adverse events (AEs) through 3 months. Results A total of 214 women were randomized to Device ( n  = 113) or Control ( n  = 101) arms. Of 113 Device assignees, 82 had a device placed, of whom 68 delivered vaginally. Of 101 Control participants, 85 delivered vaginally. At 3 months, 110 participants, 46 Device subjects who received full device treatment, and 64 Controls underwent ultrasound for the per-protocol analysis. No full LAM avulsions (0.0%) occurred in the Device group versus 7 out of 64 (10.9%) in the Control group ( p  = 0.040; two-tailed Fisher’s test). A single maternal serious AE (laceration) was device related; no neonate serious AEs were device related. Conclusions The pelvic floor dilator device significantly reduced the incidence of complete LAM avulsion in nulliparous individuals undergoing first vaginal childbirth. The dilator demonstrated an acceptable safety profile and was well received by recipients. Use of the intrapartum electromechanical pelvic floor dilator in laboring nulliparous individuals may reduce the rate of LAM avulsion, an injury associated with serious sequelae including pelvic organ prolapse.

Background Despite all the evidence corroborating the selective use of episiotomy and although routine use of the procedure is contraindicated, there are no evidences corroborating if episiotomy is necessary in any circumstance. The present clinical randomized trial was performed to compare maternal and perinatal outcomes in women submitted to a non-episiotomy protocol versus one of selective episiotomy. Methods An open-labelled, randomized clinical trial was carried out in a tertiary teaching hospital in Recife, Northeastern Brazil. Women in labor with a full-term live foetus, dilatation of 6 to 8 cm and cephalic presentation (vertex position) were included. Exclusion criteria consisted of bleeding disorders and an indication for a caesarean section. After signing the consent form, 241 women were randomized to a non-episiotomy protocol (the experimental group) or to a selective episiotomy group (the control group). No episiotomies were to be performed in the experimental group except under exceptional circumstances. In the control group, selective episiotomies were to be performed in accordance with the healthcare professionals’ clinical judgement. Maternal and perinatal outcomes were evaluated. Ratio Risk (RR) and the 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated for our outcomes. Results The analysis include 115 women assigned to a non-episiotomy protocol and 122 to selective episiotomy. There was no difference between the two groups with respect to maternal or perinatal outcomes. The episiotomy rate was similar (two cases in each group, about 1.7%), as was the duration of the second stage of labor, the frequency of perineal tears, severe perineal trauma, need for perineal suturing and blood loss at delivery. Conclusions A non-episiotomy protocol appears to be safe for mother and child, and highlights the need to investigate whether there is, in fact, any indication for this procedure. Trial registration This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under reference number ( NCT02178111 ).

Background As a quality marker and a tool for benchmarking between units, a visual analogue scale (VAS) (ranging from 1 to 10) to estimate woman’s satisfaction with childbirth was introduced in 2014. This study aimed to assess how obstetric interventions and complications affected women’s satisfaction with childbirth. Methods A retrospective cohort study including 16,775 women with an available VAS score who gave birth between January 2016 and December 2017. VAS score, maternal and obstetric characteristics were obtained from electronic medical records and crude and adjusted odds ratios (aOR) were calculated. Results The total prevalence of dissatisfaction with childbirth (VAS 1–3) was 5.7%. The main risk factors for dissatisfaction with childbirth were emergency cesarean section, aOR 3.98 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.27–4.86, postpartum hemorrhage ≥2000 ml, aOR 1.85 95%CI 1.24–2.76 and Apgar score < 7 at five minutes, aOR 2.95 95%CI 1.95–4.47. The amount of postpartum hemorrhage showed a dose-response relation to dissatisfaction with childbirth. Moreover, labor induction, instrumental vaginal delivery, and obstetric anal sphincter injury were significantly associated with women’s dissatisfaction with childbirth. A total number of 4429/21204 (21%) women giving birth during the study period had missing values on VAS. A comparison of characteristics between women with and without a recorded VAS score was performed. There were statistically significant differences in maternal age and maternal BMI between the study population and excluded women due to missing values on VAS. Moreover, 64% of the women excluded were multiparas, compared to 59% in the study population. Conclusions Obstetric interventions and complications, including emergency cesareans section and postpartum hemorrhage, were significantly related to dissatisfaction with childbirth. Such events are common and awareness of these associations might lead to a more individualized care of women during and after childbirth.

Macrosomic fetuses are at increased risk of shoulder dystocia. We aimed to compare induction of labour with expectant management for large-for-date fetuses for prevention of shoulder dystocia and other neonatal and maternal morbidity associated with macrosomia. We did this pragmatic, randomised controlled trial between Oct 1, 2002, and Jan 1, 2009, in 19 tertiary-care centres in France, Switzerland, and Belgium. Women with singleton fetuses whose estimated weight exceeded the 95th percentile, were randomly assigned (1:1), via computer-generated permuted-block randomisation (block size of four to eight) to receive induction of labour within 3 days between 37+0 weeks and 38+6 weeks of gestation, or expectant management. Randomisation was stratified by centre. Participants and caregivers were not masked to group assignment. Our primary outcome was a composite of clinically significant shoulder dystocia, fracture of the clavicle, brachial plexus injury, intracranial haemorrhage, or death. We did analyses by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00190320. We randomly assigned 409 women to the induction group and 413 women to the expectant management group, of whom 407 women and 411 women, respectively, were included in the final analysis. Mean birthweight was 3831 g (SD 324) in the induction group and 4118 g (392) in the expectant group. Induction of labour significantly reduced the risk of shoulder dystocia or associated morbidity (n=8) compared with expectant management (n=25; relative risk [RR] 0·32, 95% CI 0·15–0·71; p=0·004). We recorded no brachial plexus injuries, intracranial haemorrhages, or perinatal deaths. The likelihood of spontaneous vaginal delivery was higher in women in the induction group than in those in the expectant management group (RR 1·14, 95% CI 1·01–1·29). Caesarean delivery and neonatal morbidity did not differ significantly between the groups. Induction of labour for suspected large-for-date fetuses is associated with a reduced risk of shoulder dystocia and associated morbidity compared with expectant management. Induction of labour does not increase the risk of caesarean delivery and improves the likelihood of spontaneous vaginal delivery. These benefits should be balanced with the effects of early-term induction of labour. Assistance Publique–Hôpitaux de Paris and the University of Geneva.