澳大利亚助产士在引产期间静脉输液管理的调查

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 NURSING
Darren J. Lowen , Nicole Carlon , Russell Hodgson
{"title":"澳大利亚助产士在引产期间静脉输液管理的调查","authors":"Darren J. Lowen ,&nbsp;Nicole Carlon ,&nbsp;Russell Hodgson","doi":"10.1016/j.colegn.2023.07.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Guidelines are in place for obstetric<span> indications that warrant an induction of labour as detailed by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians<span> and Gynaecologists and Safer Care Victoria. However, no such guidelines or policies exist for the management of fluids during labour.</span></span></p></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><p>To determine if there is variability within Australia, as it pertains to the management of intravenous fluids, during induction of labour, as captured by Australian midwives’ responses to an electronic survey.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A REDCap survey was made available to midwives registered with the Australian College of Midwives, through the college’s monthly newsletter.</p></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><p>A total of 189/4445 (4.25%) midwives registered with the Australian College of Midwives completed the survey. A response was received from midwives covering all states and territories of Australia, from a total of 62 hospitals. The primary place of work was listed as a public hospital by 95.2% of the respondents. Variability was noted for the concentration of oxytocin that was used. The crystalloid of choice was either Hartmann's solution (73.5%) or normal saline (25.4%).</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>The management of intravenous fluid as documented by midwives during induction of labour varied widely throughout Australia and even varies within the same institutions. This may suggest that within these institutions, a policy to guide intravenous fluid management does not exist, which may be indicative of the lack of literature to guide such a policy.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>It is currently unknown if the wide variability in intravenous fluid management during induction of labour is impacting upon birth outcomes. Further research in this area is warranted.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":55241,"journal":{"name":"Collegian","volume":"30 5","pages":"Pages 640-646"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A survey of Australian midwifery intravenous fluid management during induction of labour\",\"authors\":\"Darren J. Lowen ,&nbsp;Nicole Carlon ,&nbsp;Russell Hodgson\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.colegn.2023.07.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Guidelines are in place for obstetric<span> indications that warrant an induction of labour as detailed by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians<span> and Gynaecologists and Safer Care Victoria. However, no such guidelines or policies exist for the management of fluids during labour.</span></span></p></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><p>To determine if there is variability within Australia, as it pertains to the management of intravenous fluids, during induction of labour, as captured by Australian midwives’ responses to an electronic survey.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A REDCap survey was made available to midwives registered with the Australian College of Midwives, through the college’s monthly newsletter.</p></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><p>A total of 189/4445 (4.25%) midwives registered with the Australian College of Midwives completed the survey. A response was received from midwives covering all states and territories of Australia, from a total of 62 hospitals. The primary place of work was listed as a public hospital by 95.2% of the respondents. Variability was noted for the concentration of oxytocin that was used. The crystalloid of choice was either Hartmann's solution (73.5%) or normal saline (25.4%).</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>The management of intravenous fluid as documented by midwives during induction of labour varied widely throughout Australia and even varies within the same institutions. This may suggest that within these institutions, a policy to guide intravenous fluid management does not exist, which may be indicative of the lack of literature to guide such a policy.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>It is currently unknown if the wide variability in intravenous fluid management during induction of labour is impacting upon birth outcomes. Further research in this area is warranted.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55241,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Collegian\",\"volume\":\"30 5\",\"pages\":\"Pages 640-646\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Collegian\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1322769623000732\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Collegian","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1322769623000732","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:澳大利亚皇家和新西兰妇产科学院以及维多利亚安全护理中心对引产的产科指征进行了详细的指导。然而,没有这种指导方针或政策来管理分娩期间的液体。目的根据澳大利亚助产士对一项电子调查的答复,确定澳大利亚国内在引产期间静脉输液管理方面是否存在差异。方法REDCap调查通过澳大利亚助产士学院的月刊向注册助产士提供。调查结果共有189/4445名在澳洲助产士学院注册的助产士(4.25%)完成调查。收到了来自澳大利亚所有州和地区共62家医院的助产士的答复。95.2%的受访者将主要工作地点列为公立医院。所使用的催产素浓度的变化值得注意。晶体的选择是哈特曼溶液(73.5%)或生理盐水(25.4%)。根据助产士在引产过程中记录的静脉输液管理在澳大利亚各地差别很大,甚至在同一机构内也各不相同。这可能表明,在这些机构中,不存在指导静脉输液管理的政策,这可能表明缺乏指导此类政策的文献。结论目前尚不清楚引产过程中静脉输液管理的广泛差异是否会影响分娩结果。这方面的进一步研究是有必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A survey of Australian midwifery intravenous fluid management during induction of labour

Background

Guidelines are in place for obstetric indications that warrant an induction of labour as detailed by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and Safer Care Victoria. However, no such guidelines or policies exist for the management of fluids during labour.

Aim

To determine if there is variability within Australia, as it pertains to the management of intravenous fluids, during induction of labour, as captured by Australian midwives’ responses to an electronic survey.

Methods

A REDCap survey was made available to midwives registered with the Australian College of Midwives, through the college’s monthly newsletter.

Findings

A total of 189/4445 (4.25%) midwives registered with the Australian College of Midwives completed the survey. A response was received from midwives covering all states and territories of Australia, from a total of 62 hospitals. The primary place of work was listed as a public hospital by 95.2% of the respondents. Variability was noted for the concentration of oxytocin that was used. The crystalloid of choice was either Hartmann's solution (73.5%) or normal saline (25.4%).

Discussion

The management of intravenous fluid as documented by midwives during induction of labour varied widely throughout Australia and even varies within the same institutions. This may suggest that within these institutions, a policy to guide intravenous fluid management does not exist, which may be indicative of the lack of literature to guide such a policy.

Conclusion

It is currently unknown if the wide variability in intravenous fluid management during induction of labour is impacting upon birth outcomes. Further research in this area is warranted.

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
Collegian
Collegian NURSING-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
127
审稿时长
72 days
期刊介绍: Collegian: The Australian Journal of Nursing Practice, Scholarship and Research is the official journal of Australian College of Nursing (ACN). The journal aims to reflect the broad interests of nurses and the nursing profession, and to challenge nurses on emerging areas of interest. It publishes research articles and scholarly discussion of nursing practice, policy and professional issues. Papers published in the journal are peer reviewed by a double blind process using reviewers who meet high standards of academic and clinical expertise. Invited papers that contribute to nursing knowledge and debate are published at the discretion of the Editor. The journal, online only from 2016, is available to members of ACN and also by separate subscription. ACN believes that each and every nurse in Australia should have the opportunity to grow their career through quality education, and further our profession through representation. ACN is the voice of influence, providing the nursing expertise and experience required when government and key stakeholders are deciding the future of health.
×
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