the aim of the study was to conduct a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of non-invasive and non-pharmacological techniques on labor first-stage pain intensity. Literature databases were searched from inception to May 2021, and research was expanded through the screening of previous systematic reviews. Inclusion criteria were: (1) population: women in first stage of labor; (2) intervention: non-pharmacological, non-invasive, or minimally invasive intrapartum analgesic techniques alternative and/or complementary to pharmacological analgesia; (3) comparison: rou-tine intrapartum care or placebos; (4) outcomes: subjective pain intensity; and (5) study design: randomized controlled trial. Risk of bias of included studies was investigated, data analysis was performed using R version 3.5.1. Effect size was calculated as difference between the control and experimental groups at posttreatment in terms of mean pain score. A total of 63 studies were included, for a total of 6146 patients (3468 in the experimental groups and 2678 in the control groups). Techniques included were massage (n = 11), birth balls (n = 5) mind-body interventions (n = 8), heat application (n = 12), music therapy (n = 9), dance therapy (n = 2), acupressure (n = 16), and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) (n = 8). The present review found significant evidence in support of the use of complementary and alternative medicine for labor analgesia, and different methods showed different impact. However, more high-quality trials are needed.

Labor‌ ‌Analgesia: A‌ ‌Systematic‌ ‌Review‌ ‌and‌ ‌ Meta-Analysis‌ of‌ ‌Non-Pharmacological‌ ‌Complementary‌ ‌and‌ ‌Alternative‌ ‌Approaches‌ ‌to‌ ‌Pain‌ ‌during‌ ‌First‌ ‌Stage‌ ‌of‌ ‌Labor‌ ‌ / Melillo, A.; Maiorano, P.; Rachedi, S.; Caggianese, G.; Gragnano, E.; Gallo, L.; De Pietro, G.; Guida, M.; Giordano, A.; Chirico, A.. - In: CRITICAL REVIEWS IN EUKARYOTIC GENE EXPRESSION. - ISSN 1045-4403. - 32:2(2022), pp. 61-89. [10.1615/CritRevEukaryotGeneExpr.2021039986]

Labor‌ ‌Analgesia: A‌ ‌Systematic‌ ‌Review‌ ‌and‌ ‌ Meta-Analysis‌ of‌ ‌Non-Pharmacological‌ ‌Complementary‌ ‌and‌ ‌Alternative‌ ‌Approaches‌ ‌to‌ ‌Pain‌ ‌during‌ ‌First‌ ‌Stage‌ ‌of‌ ‌Labor‌ ‌

Chirico A.
2022

Abstract

the aim of the study was to conduct a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of non-invasive and non-pharmacological techniques on labor first-stage pain intensity. Literature databases were searched from inception to May 2021, and research was expanded through the screening of previous systematic reviews. Inclusion criteria were: (1) population: women in first stage of labor; (2) intervention: non-pharmacological, non-invasive, or minimally invasive intrapartum analgesic techniques alternative and/or complementary to pharmacological analgesia; (3) comparison: rou-tine intrapartum care or placebos; (4) outcomes: subjective pain intensity; and (5) study design: randomized controlled trial. Risk of bias of included studies was investigated, data analysis was performed using R version 3.5.1. Effect size was calculated as difference between the control and experimental groups at posttreatment in terms of mean pain score. A total of 63 studies were included, for a total of 6146 patients (3468 in the experimental groups and 2678 in the control groups). Techniques included were massage (n = 11), birth balls (n = 5) mind-body interventions (n = 8), heat application (n = 12), music therapy (n = 9), dance therapy (n = 2), acupressure (n = 16), and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) (n = 8). The present review found significant evidence in support of the use of complementary and alternative medicine for labor analgesia, and different methods showed different impact. However, more high-quality trials are needed.
2022
analgesia; childbirth; complementary; labor; pain
01 Pubblicazione su rivista::01a Articolo in rivista
Labor‌ ‌Analgesia: A‌ ‌Systematic‌ ‌Review‌ ‌and‌ ‌ Meta-Analysis‌ of‌ ‌Non-Pharmacological‌ ‌Complementary‌ ‌and‌ ‌Alternative‌ ‌Approaches‌ ‌to‌ ‌Pain‌ ‌during‌ ‌First‌ ‌Stage‌ ‌of‌ ‌Labor‌ ‌ / Melillo, A.; Maiorano, P.; Rachedi, S.; Caggianese, G.; Gragnano, E.; Gallo, L.; De Pietro, G.; Guida, M.; Giordano, A.; Chirico, A.. - In: CRITICAL REVIEWS IN EUKARYOTIC GENE EXPRESSION. - ISSN 1045-4403. - 32:2(2022), pp. 61-89. [10.1615/CritRevEukaryotGeneExpr.2021039986]
File allegati a questo prodotto
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/1685615
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 2
  • Scopus 3
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 3
social impact