Impact of continuous labour companion- who is the best: A comprehensive meta-analysis on familiarity, training, temporal association, and geographical location

DMCS Jayasundara, IA Jayawardane, SDS Weliange, TDKM Jayasingha, TMSSB Madugalle
{"title":"Impact of continuous labour companion- who is the best: A comprehensive meta-analysis on familiarity, training, temporal association, and geographical location","authors":"DMCS Jayasundara, IA Jayawardane, SDS Weliange, TDKM Jayasingha, TMSSB Madugalle","doi":"10.1101/2024.02.02.24302191","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract\nBackground: Continuous labour support is widely acknowledged for potentially enhancing maternal and neonatal outcomes and smoothing the labour process. However, existing literature lacks a comprehensive analysis of the optimal characteristics of labour companions, particularly in comparing the effects of trained versus untrained and familiar versus unfamiliar labour companions across diverse geographical regions and pre and post-millennial. This meta-analysis addresses these research gaps by providing insights into the most influential aspects of continuous labour support.\nMethodology: A thorough search of PubMed, Google Scholar, Science Direct, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov, Research4Life, and Cochrane Library was conducted. Study selection utilised the semi-automated tool Rayyan. The Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB2) tool and funnel plots gauged the risk of bias. Statistical analysis employed RevMan 5.4, using Mantel-Haenszel statistics and random effects models to calculate risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Subgroup analyses were performed for different characteristics, including familiarity, training, temporal associations, and geographical locations. The study was registered in INPLASY. (Registration number: INPLASY202410003)\nResults: Thirty-five randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from 5,346 studies. The meta-analysis highlighted significant positive effects of continuous labour support across various outcomes. There was a substantial improvement in the 5-minute APGAR score < 7, with an effect size of 1.52 (95% CI 1.05, 2.20). Familiar labour companions showed a higher effect size in reducing tocophobia, 1.73 (95% CI 1.49, 2.42), compared to unfamiliar companions, 1.34 (95% CI 1.14, 1.58). Differences were noted between trained and untrained companions, favouring untrained companions in reducing tocophobia and the cesarean section rate. Studies conducted after 2000 had a more significant impact on decreasing labour duration. Geographical variations indicated more pronounced effects in Asia and Africa than in Europe.\nDiscussion and Conclusion: The meta-analysis underscores the benefits of labour companionship, particularly in facilitating the parturient experience of spontaneous labour. The impact is more pronounced in specific subgroups, such as familiar companions, untrained companions, recent studies, and studies conducted in Asia and Africa. The study recommends integrating labour companionship into obstetric care pending further research, standardisation, and awareness initiatives to enhance maternal and neonatal outcomes. Challenges such as study heterogeneity, insufficient data on companion training, and temporal outcome variations are acknowledged.","PeriodicalId":501409,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Obstetrics and Gynecology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Obstetrics and Gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.02.02.24302191","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Background: Continuous labour support is widely acknowledged for potentially enhancing maternal and neonatal outcomes and smoothing the labour process. However, existing literature lacks a comprehensive analysis of the optimal characteristics of labour companions, particularly in comparing the effects of trained versus untrained and familiar versus unfamiliar labour companions across diverse geographical regions and pre and post-millennial. This meta-analysis addresses these research gaps by providing insights into the most influential aspects of continuous labour support. Methodology: A thorough search of PubMed, Google Scholar, Science Direct, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov, Research4Life, and Cochrane Library was conducted. Study selection utilised the semi-automated tool Rayyan. The Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB2) tool and funnel plots gauged the risk of bias. Statistical analysis employed RevMan 5.4, using Mantel-Haenszel statistics and random effects models to calculate risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Subgroup analyses were performed for different characteristics, including familiarity, training, temporal associations, and geographical locations. The study was registered in INPLASY. (Registration number: INPLASY202410003) Results: Thirty-five randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from 5,346 studies. The meta-analysis highlighted significant positive effects of continuous labour support across various outcomes. There was a substantial improvement in the 5-minute APGAR score < 7, with an effect size of 1.52 (95% CI 1.05, 2.20). Familiar labour companions showed a higher effect size in reducing tocophobia, 1.73 (95% CI 1.49, 2.42), compared to unfamiliar companions, 1.34 (95% CI 1.14, 1.58). Differences were noted between trained and untrained companions, favouring untrained companions in reducing tocophobia and the cesarean section rate. Studies conducted after 2000 had a more significant impact on decreasing labour duration. Geographical variations indicated more pronounced effects in Asia and Africa than in Europe. Discussion and Conclusion: The meta-analysis underscores the benefits of labour companionship, particularly in facilitating the parturient experience of spontaneous labour. The impact is more pronounced in specific subgroups, such as familiar companions, untrained companions, recent studies, and studies conducted in Asia and Africa. The study recommends integrating labour companionship into obstetric care pending further research, standardisation, and awareness initiatives to enhance maternal and neonatal outcomes. Challenges such as study heterogeneity, insufficient data on companion training, and temporal outcome variations are acknowledged.
连续陪产的影响--谁是最好的:关于熟悉程度、培训、时间关联和地理位置的综合荟萃分析
摘要背景:持续的分娩支持被广泛认为有可能改善产妇和新生儿的预后,并使分娩过程更加顺利。然而,现有文献缺乏对最佳陪产人员特征的全面分析,尤其是缺乏对不同地区、不同年龄段的陪产人员在训练有素与未经训练、熟悉与不熟悉之间的效果比较。本荟萃分析通过深入分析持续性劳动支持最有影响力的方面,填补了这些研究空白:对 PubMed、Google Scholar、Science Direct、International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP)、ClinicalTrials.gov、Research4Life 和 Cochrane Library 进行了全面检索。利用半自动化工具 Rayyan 进行研究筛选。Cochrane偏倚风险(RoB2)工具和漏斗图衡量偏倚风险。统计分析采用 RevMan 5.4,使用 Mantel-Haenszel 统计法和随机效应模型计算风险比和 95% 置信区间。针对不同的特征进行了分组分析,包括熟悉程度、培训、时间关联和地理位置。该研究已在 INPLASY 注册(注册号:INPLASY202410003):从 5346 项研究中确定了 35 项随机对照试验 (RCT)。荟萃分析强调了持续性分娩支持对各种结果的显著积极影响。5 分钟 APGAR 评分 < 7 显著提高,效应大小为 1.52(95% CI 1.05,2.20)。与不熟悉的陪产人员相比,熟悉的陪产人员在减少恐高症方面的效应大小更高,为 1.73(95% CI 1.49,2.42),而不熟悉的陪产人员的效应大小为 1.34(95% CI 1.14,1.58)。经过培训和未经过培训的陪产人员之间存在差异,未经过培训的陪产人员更有利于降低恐高症和剖宫产率。2000 年后进行的研究对缩短产程有更显著的影响。地域差异表明,亚洲和非洲的效果比欧洲更明显:荟萃分析强调了陪伴分娩的益处,尤其是在促进产妇体验自然分娩方面。在特定的分组中,如熟悉的陪产人员、未经培训的陪产人员、近期的研究以及在亚洲和非洲进行的研究,陪产的影响更为明显。研究建议将陪产纳入产科护理中,以待进一步的研究、标准化和宣传活动,从而提高产妇和新生儿的预后。该研究承认存在一些挑战,如研究的异质性、关于陪护培训的数据不足以及时间上的结果差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信