Induction of labor: An integrated review
- 1 March 1994
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Health Care for Women International
- Vol. 15 (2) , 135-148
- https://doi.org/10.1080/07399339409516105
Abstract
Women's response to induction and augmentation of labor has received little attention in North America. A review of the literature revealed that these procedures epitomize the use of technology in childbirth. From a psycho‐emotional perspective, women respond less positively to induction and augmentation than to spontaneous labor and report less satisfaction with the birth experience. In this review of the research and anecdotal literature, reasons for inattention to induction and augmentation are explored, and the nature of the procedures and women's response to them are examined.Keywords
This publication has 20 references indexed in Scilit:
- Elective induction of labor: a prospective clinical study, I: Obstetric and neonatal effectsjpme, 1985
- Elective induction of labor: a prospective clinical study, II: Psychological effectsjpme, 1985
- Expectations For Childbirth Versus Actual Experiences: The Gap WidensMCN: The American Journal of Maternal/Child Nursing, 1984
- A RETROSPECTIVE STUDY OF INDUCTION OF LABOURBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1979
- Good Grief: Coming to Terms with the Childbirth ExperienceJOGN Nursing, 1978
- Mothers' experiences of inductionBMJ, 1977
- Patients' attitudes to induction and labour.BMJ, 1977
- Labor and Birth.Nursing Forum, 1975
- PATIENT RESPONSE TO INDUCTION OF LABOURThe Lancet, 1975
- Childbirth as a crisis: A test of Janis's theory of communication and stress resolution.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975