scholarly journals Beneficios de la hidroterapia en el trabajo de parto. Estudio de revisión.

MUSAS ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Benavides-Navarro ◽  
Andrea Benavides-Navarro

Introduction The growing demand of pregnant women to achieve a delivery as physiological as possible has led to a decrease in interventional techniques and consequently a rise in the search for alternative techniques for the relief of pain during labor, among which we can highlight hydrotherapy. Objectives To describe the effectiveness of the use of hydrotherapy in relation to the perception of pain during labor. Methodology Bibliographic review using the databases PubMed, Cuiden, Cuidatge, Cochrane Library and CINHAL. Results A total of 17 articles have been included: 13 original articles and 4 bibliographic reviews. In addition to this, the Clinical Practice Guideline on Normal Birth Care has been used. The articles refer to the maternal and perinatal results of the use of hydrotherapy in the dilatation phase and the expulsive phase, as well as the perceptions of midwives, nurses and pregnant women of its use. Conclusions The use of the hydrotherapy during the dilation phase of labor decreases the perception of pain and the use of pharmacological measures. However, the safety and efficacy of immersion in water in the expulsive phase have not been established and no benefits have been associated for the mother or the foetus.

BMJ ◽  
2017 ◽  
pp. j3961 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reed A C Siemieniuk ◽  
Lyubov Lytvyn ◽  
Jinell Mah Ming ◽  
Rhonda Marama Mullen ◽  
Florence Anam ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. e6-e17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom J Overend ◽  
Cathy M Anderson ◽  
Dina Brooks ◽  
Lisa Cicutto ◽  
Michael Keim ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVES: To update a previous clinical practice guideline on suctioning in adult patients, published in theCanadian Respiratory Journalin 2001.METHODS: A primary search of the MEDLINE (from 1998), CINAHL, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library (all from 1996) databases up to November 2007, was conducted. These dates reflect the search limits reached in the previous clinical practice guideline. A secondary search of the reference lists of retrieved articles was also performed. Two reviewers independently appraised each study before meeting to reach consensus. Study quality was evaluated using the Jadad and PEDro scales. When sufficient data were available, a meta-analysis was conducted using a random effects model. Data are reported as ORs, weighted mean differences and 95% CIs. When no comparisons were possible, qualitative analyses of the data were completed.RESULTS: Eighty-one studies were critically appraised from a pool of 123. A total of 28 randomized controlled trials or randomized crossover studies were accepted for inclusion. Meta-analysis was possible for open versus closed suctioning only. Recommendations from 2001 with respect to hyperoxygenation, hyperinflation, use of a ventilator circuit adaptor and subglottic suctioning were confirmed. New evidence was identified with respect to indications for suctioning, open suction versus closed suction systems, use of medications and infection control.CONCLUSIONS: While new evidence continues to be varied in strength, and is still lacking in some areas of suctioning practice, the evidence base has improved since 2001. Members of the health care team should incorporate this evidence into their practice.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document