Position in the second stage of labour for women without epidural anaesthesia
- 26 January 2004
- reference entry
- Published by Wiley
- No. 1,p. CD002006
- https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd002006.pub2
Abstract
For centuries, there has been controversy around whether being upright (sitting, birthing stools, chairs, squatting) or lying down have advantages for women delivering their babies. To assess the benefits and risks of the use of different positions during the second stage of labour (i.e. from full dilatation of the cervix). We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Trials Register (30 September 2005). We updated this search on 12 June 2009 and added the results to the awaiting classification section. Trials that used randomised or quasi‐randomised allocation and appropriate follow up and compared various positions assumed by pregnant women during the second stage of labour. We independently assessed the trials for inclusion and extracted the data. Results should be interpreted with caution as the methodological quality of the 20 included trials (6135 participants) was variable. Use of any upright or lateral position, compared with supine or lithotomy positions, was associated with: reduced duration of second stage of labour (9 trials: mean 4.28 minutes, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.93 to 5.63 minutes) ‐ this was largely due to a considerable reduction in women allocated to the use of the birth cushion; a small reduction in assisted deliveries (19 trials: relative risk (RR) 0.80, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.92); a reduction in episiotomies (12 trials: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.92); an increase in second degree perineal tears (11 trials: RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.39); increased estimated blood loss greater than 500 ml (11 trials: RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.05); reduced reporting of severe pain during second stage of labour (1 trial: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.90); fewer abnormal fetal heart rate patterns (1 trial: RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.98). The tentative findings of this review suggest several possible benefits for upright posture, with the possibility of increased risk of blood loss greater than 500 ml. Women should be encouraged to give birth in the position they find most comfortable. Until such time as the benefits and risks of various delivery positions are estimated with greater certainty, when methodologically stringent trials' data are available, women should be allowed to make informed choices about the birth positions in which they might wish to assume for delivery of their babies. [Note: The four citations in the awaiting assessment section of the review may alter the conclusions of the review once assessed.]Keywords
This publication has 44 references indexed in Scilit:
- Use of McRoberts' position during delivery and increase in pushing efficiencyThe Lancet, 2001
- Author's ReplyBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1999
- Influence of the position of the mother at delivery over some maternal and neonatal outcomesInternational Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 1998
- Randomised trial comparing the upright and supine positions for the second stage of labourBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1997
- Why Deliver in the Supine Position?Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1992
- The action of squatting in the early postnatal period marginally increases pelvic dimensionsBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1989
- Adapting Hospital Obstetrics to Birth in the Squatting PositionBirth, 1985
- Effects of standing position on spontaneous uterine contractility and other aspects of laborjpme, 1975
- THE INFLUENCE OF MATERNAL POSTURE AT BIRTH ON THE FETUSBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1973
- The Movements at the Sacro‐Iliac Joints and their Importance to Changes in the Pelvic Dimensions During ParturitionActa Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 1957