药物镇痛方法对分娩体验的有效性:系统回顾和荟萃分析

Solmaz Ghanbari-Homayi, Sonia Hasani, H. Pourfathi, M. Mirghafourvand
{"title":"药物镇痛方法对分娩体验的有效性:系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Solmaz Ghanbari-Homayi, Sonia Hasani, H. Pourfathi, M. Mirghafourvand","doi":"10.2174/1573404817999201230234158","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n\nThe use of pharmacological pain relief methods during labour is increasing, however there is no\nclear evidence that pharmacological interventions can also improve women’s satisfaction with birth experience.\n\n\n\nTo assess the effectiveness of pharmacological interventions on women's satisfaction with birth experience\n(primary outcome) and satisfaction with the received method (secondary outcome).\n\n\n\nWe searched databases in English (MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, ProQuest, Scopus and Web of\nScience) and Persian languages (SID and Magiran) from inception until April 30, 2018 for clinical trials that\npharmacological pain relief methods were compared with standard or routine cares, or non-pharmacological methods. The\nevaluation of studies in term of risk of bias was conducted using the Cochrane Handbook. Meta-analysis results were\nreported as OR and 95% confidence interval. In meta-analysis, subgroup analysis was performed based on the type of\nintervention. Due to the heterogeneity of over 30%, random effect was reported instead of the fixed effect. The heterogeneity\nwas evaluated using I2, T2 and Chi2. The evaluation of the quality of the studies was also examined using the Grading of\nRecommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group (GRADE) approach.\n\n\n\nThe results of 7 studies with low-quality in meta-analysis, showed that pharmacological methods significantly\nimproved satisfaction with birth experience (OR = 2.99; 95% CI: 1.37 to 6.52; P = 0.006). However, meta-analysis of\nsubgroups showed that only inhalation of Entonox gas (OR = 6.51; 95% CI: 3.47 to 12.22; P < 0.001), in contrast to epidural\nanalgesia (OR = 1.19; 95% CI: 0.62 to 2.27; P = 0.60) and Hyoscine injection (OR = 2.58; 95% CI: 0.93 to 7.20; P = 0.07)\nsignificantly improved satisfaction with birth experience.\n\n\n\nPharmacological interventions such as epidural, although introduced as one of the effective methods for pain\nrelief, may not provide women with satisfaction with birth. However, more studies with precise methodology, high sample\nsize, and standard tools should be performed to more accurately investigate the effect of pharmacological interventions on\nbirth experience.\n","PeriodicalId":371340,"journal":{"name":"Current Womens Health Reviews","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of Pharmacological Pain Relief Methods on Birth Experience: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Solmaz Ghanbari-Homayi, Sonia Hasani, H. Pourfathi, M. Mirghafourvand\",\"doi\":\"10.2174/1573404817999201230234158\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n\\nThe use of pharmacological pain relief methods during labour is increasing, however there is no\\nclear evidence that pharmacological interventions can also improve women’s satisfaction with birth experience.\\n\\n\\n\\nTo assess the effectiveness of pharmacological interventions on women's satisfaction with birth experience\\n(primary outcome) and satisfaction with the received method (secondary outcome).\\n\\n\\n\\nWe searched databases in English (MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, ProQuest, Scopus and Web of\\nScience) and Persian languages (SID and Magiran) from inception until April 30, 2018 for clinical trials that\\npharmacological pain relief methods were compared with standard or routine cares, or non-pharmacological methods. The\\nevaluation of studies in term of risk of bias was conducted using the Cochrane Handbook. Meta-analysis results were\\nreported as OR and 95% confidence interval. In meta-analysis, subgroup analysis was performed based on the type of\\nintervention. Due to the heterogeneity of over 30%, random effect was reported instead of the fixed effect. The heterogeneity\\nwas evaluated using I2, T2 and Chi2. The evaluation of the quality of the studies was also examined using the Grading of\\nRecommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group (GRADE) approach.\\n\\n\\n\\nThe results of 7 studies with low-quality in meta-analysis, showed that pharmacological methods significantly\\nimproved satisfaction with birth experience (OR = 2.99; 95% CI: 1.37 to 6.52; P = 0.006). However, meta-analysis of\\nsubgroups showed that only inhalation of Entonox gas (OR = 6.51; 95% CI: 3.47 to 12.22; P < 0.001), in contrast to epidural\\nanalgesia (OR = 1.19; 95% CI: 0.62 to 2.27; P = 0.60) and Hyoscine injection (OR = 2.58; 95% CI: 0.93 to 7.20; P = 0.07)\\nsignificantly improved satisfaction with birth experience.\\n\\n\\n\\nPharmacological interventions such as epidural, although introduced as one of the effective methods for pain\\nrelief, may not provide women with satisfaction with birth. However, more studies with precise methodology, high sample\\nsize, and standard tools should be performed to more accurately investigate the effect of pharmacological interventions on\\nbirth experience.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":371340,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Womens Health Reviews\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Womens Health Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2174/1573404817999201230234158\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Womens Health Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/1573404817999201230234158","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

在分娩过程中使用药物缓解疼痛的方法越来越多,但是没有明确的证据表明药物干预也可以提高妇女对分娩体验的满意度。评估药物干预对产妇分娩体验满意度(主要结局)和分娩方法满意度(次要结局)的影响。我们检索了英文数据库(MEDLINE、Cochrane Library、Embase、ProQuest、Scopus和Web ofScience)和波斯语数据库(SID和Magiran),从开始到2018年4月30日,将药理学疼痛缓解方法与标准或常规护理或非药理学方法进行比较的临床试验。使用Cochrane手册对研究的偏倚风险进行评估。meta分析结果报告为OR和95%置信区间。在meta分析中,根据干预类型进行亚组分析。由于异质性超过30%,报告的是随机效应,而不是固定效应。采用I2、T2和Chi2评价异质性。研究质量的评估也使用推荐、评估、发展和评估工作组(GRADE)的分级方法进行了检查。荟萃分析的7项低质量研究结果显示,药理学方法可显著提高分娩体验满意度(OR = 2.99;95% CI: 1.37 ~ 6.52;P = 0.006)。然而,亚组荟萃分析显示,仅吸入恩托诺克斯气体(OR = 6.51;95% CI: 3.47 ~ 12.22;P < 0.001),与硬膜外镇痛相比(OR = 1.19;95% CI: 0.62 ~ 2.27;P = 0.60)和海莨菪碱注射液(OR = 2.58;95% CI: 0.93 ~ 7.20;P = 0.07)显著提高分娩体验满意度。药物干预,如硬膜外,虽然作为一种有效的方法来缓解疼痛,可能不能提供妇女满意分娩。然而,为了更准确地调查药物干预对分娩体验的影响,需要更多的研究,采用精确的方法、高样本量和标准工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effectiveness of Pharmacological Pain Relief Methods on Birth Experience: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
The use of pharmacological pain relief methods during labour is increasing, however there is no clear evidence that pharmacological interventions can also improve women’s satisfaction with birth experience. To assess the effectiveness of pharmacological interventions on women's satisfaction with birth experience (primary outcome) and satisfaction with the received method (secondary outcome). We searched databases in English (MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, ProQuest, Scopus and Web of Science) and Persian languages (SID and Magiran) from inception until April 30, 2018 for clinical trials that pharmacological pain relief methods were compared with standard or routine cares, or non-pharmacological methods. The evaluation of studies in term of risk of bias was conducted using the Cochrane Handbook. Meta-analysis results were reported as OR and 95% confidence interval. In meta-analysis, subgroup analysis was performed based on the type of intervention. Due to the heterogeneity of over 30%, random effect was reported instead of the fixed effect. The heterogeneity was evaluated using I2, T2 and Chi2. The evaluation of the quality of the studies was also examined using the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group (GRADE) approach. The results of 7 studies with low-quality in meta-analysis, showed that pharmacological methods significantly improved satisfaction with birth experience (OR = 2.99; 95% CI: 1.37 to 6.52; P = 0.006). However, meta-analysis of subgroups showed that only inhalation of Entonox gas (OR = 6.51; 95% CI: 3.47 to 12.22; P < 0.001), in contrast to epidural analgesia (OR = 1.19; 95% CI: 0.62 to 2.27; P = 0.60) and Hyoscine injection (OR = 2.58; 95% CI: 0.93 to 7.20; P = 0.07) significantly improved satisfaction with birth experience. Pharmacological interventions such as epidural, although introduced as one of the effective methods for pain relief, may not provide women with satisfaction with birth. However, more studies with precise methodology, high sample size, and standard tools should be performed to more accurately investigate the effect of pharmacological interventions on birth experience.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信