{"title":"Is Rectal Analgesia a Better Choice for Post Episiotomy Pain? - An Interventional Study","authors":"Frincy Francis","doi":"10.24321/2455.9318.201922","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Post episiotomy pain is accompanied by discomforts while walking, sitting and even while squatting. Managing the perineal pain is essential for a smooth transition into motherhood for any parous women. Many non-pharmacological remedies exist and are practiced yet use of analgesics are the first line of management to relieve pain. \nPurpose: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of rectal analgesic suppository among the interventional group (n=15) and the control group (n=15) with routine oral analgesics among primipara woman. Quantitative Approach using Posttest with control group design was used. Simple random sampling was done for randomization of samples. \nResult: The study found that there was a significant reduction in pain among the rectal analgesia group when compared to the oral analgesic groups. The post-test pain scores were significantly lower in the experimental group than the control group. It was also observed that there were lesser discomforts experienced while doing their activities of daily living including breastfeeding the baby in sitting position among primipara women in the interventional group than the primipara women in the control group. \nConclusion: Using rectal analgesics for post episiotomy pain is safe and comfortable and helps manage pain better and should be included in the hospital’s pain management protocol for pain relief immediately post episiotomy. \nHow to cite this article:Francis F, Rosemol MA. Is Rectal Analgesia a Better Choice for Post Episiotomy Pain? - An Interventional Study. Int J Nurs Midwif Res 2019; 6(2&3): 62-68.","PeriodicalId":392369,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Nursing & Midwifery Research","volume":"67 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Nursing & Midwifery Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24321/2455.9318.201922","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Background: Post episiotomy pain is accompanied by discomforts while walking, sitting and even while squatting. Managing the perineal pain is essential for a smooth transition into motherhood for any parous women. Many non-pharmacological remedies exist and are practiced yet use of analgesics are the first line of management to relieve pain.
Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of rectal analgesic suppository among the interventional group (n=15) and the control group (n=15) with routine oral analgesics among primipara woman. Quantitative Approach using Posttest with control group design was used. Simple random sampling was done for randomization of samples.
Result: The study found that there was a significant reduction in pain among the rectal analgesia group when compared to the oral analgesic groups. The post-test pain scores were significantly lower in the experimental group than the control group. It was also observed that there were lesser discomforts experienced while doing their activities of daily living including breastfeeding the baby in sitting position among primipara women in the interventional group than the primipara women in the control group.
Conclusion: Using rectal analgesics for post episiotomy pain is safe and comfortable and helps manage pain better and should be included in the hospital’s pain management protocol for pain relief immediately post episiotomy.
How to cite this article:Francis F, Rosemol MA. Is Rectal Analgesia a Better Choice for Post Episiotomy Pain? - An Interventional Study. Int J Nurs Midwif Res 2019; 6(2&3): 62-68.