Enema prior to labor: a controversial routine in Taiwan.

Y. Tzeng, Y. Shih, Yu-Kuei Teng, C. Chiu, Meizhi Huang
{"title":"Enema prior to labor: a controversial routine in Taiwan.","authors":"Y. Tzeng, Y. Shih, Yu-Kuei Teng, C. Chiu, Meizhi Huang","doi":"10.1097/01.JNR.0000387549.42834.A9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While taking an enema to induce labor is a controversial issue worldwide, in Taiwan it remains a routine procedure in many hospitals in preparation for birth. Episiotomy is also a prevalent procedure performed during the birthing process. Some physicians believe that enemas help reduce the risk of feces contamination of the episiotomy incision and, therefore, are justified as a routine procedure. This study compared the neonatal infection rates, times to appearance of fetal head, times to first post-labor bowel movement, and rates of episiotomy dehiscence of women receiving a pre-labor enema against those who did not. A total of 534 women classified with low-risk pregnancies were recruited from a medical center in central Taiwan and assigned randomly into one of two groups for a six-month period. The first group (264 subjects) received routine enema procedures prior to delivery in the first 6 months. The second group (270 subjects) did not receive enemas. Study results revealed no significant difference between enema and non-enema groups in terms of infection rates in mothers or infants or in terms of average time to fetal head appearance. While labor duration was the same for the two groups in the first and third stages of labor, the enema group experienced a relatively shorter second stage. No significant difference was observed in times to first post-labor bowel movement or episiotomy dehiscence rates. The results of this study indicate that the administration of enemas as a routine practice prior to labor is not substantiated by medical necessity. However, limitations of the research design suggest that a randomized clinical trial be adopted in the future to explore further the scientific validity of study results.","PeriodicalId":94242,"journal":{"name":"The journal of nursing research : JNR","volume":"237 1","pages":"263-70"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of nursing research : JNR","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/01.JNR.0000387549.42834.A9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

While taking an enema to induce labor is a controversial issue worldwide, in Taiwan it remains a routine procedure in many hospitals in preparation for birth. Episiotomy is also a prevalent procedure performed during the birthing process. Some physicians believe that enemas help reduce the risk of feces contamination of the episiotomy incision and, therefore, are justified as a routine procedure. This study compared the neonatal infection rates, times to appearance of fetal head, times to first post-labor bowel movement, and rates of episiotomy dehiscence of women receiving a pre-labor enema against those who did not. A total of 534 women classified with low-risk pregnancies were recruited from a medical center in central Taiwan and assigned randomly into one of two groups for a six-month period. The first group (264 subjects) received routine enema procedures prior to delivery in the first 6 months. The second group (270 subjects) did not receive enemas. Study results revealed no significant difference between enema and non-enema groups in terms of infection rates in mothers or infants or in terms of average time to fetal head appearance. While labor duration was the same for the two groups in the first and third stages of labor, the enema group experienced a relatively shorter second stage. No significant difference was observed in times to first post-labor bowel movement or episiotomy dehiscence rates. The results of this study indicate that the administration of enemas as a routine practice prior to labor is not substantiated by medical necessity. However, limitations of the research design suggest that a randomized clinical trial be adopted in the future to explore further the scientific validity of study results.
临产前灌肠:台湾有争议的常规。
虽然灌肠引产在世界范围内都是一个有争议的问题,但在台湾,它仍然是许多医院准备分娩的常规程序。在分娩过程中,会阴切开术也是一种普遍的手术。一些医生认为灌肠有助于降低粪便污染会阴切口的风险,因此,作为常规手术是合理的。本研究比较了新生儿感染率、胎头出现次数、分娩后第一次排便次数以及分娩前接受灌肠的妇女与未接受灌肠的妇女的会阴切开术开裂率。研究人员从台湾中部的一家医疗中心招募了534名低风险怀孕的妇女,并将她们随机分为两组,为期六个月。第一组(264名受试者)在分娩前6个月接受常规灌肠。第二组(270例)不进行灌肠。研究结果显示,在母亲或婴儿的感染率方面,灌肠组和非灌肠组之间没有显着差异,也没有在胎儿头出现的平均时间方面有显着差异。两组第一产程和第三产程持续时间相同,灌肠组第二产程相对较短。第一次分娩后排便时间和会阴切开术开裂率无显著差异。本研究结果表明,在分娩前给予灌肠作为常规做法是没有医学必要性的。然而,由于研究设计的局限性,建议未来采用随机临床试验,进一步探讨研究结果的科学有效性。
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