SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2004
Position for women during second stage of labour.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Position in the second stage of labour for women without epidural anaesthesia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Trial
- Effect of dance labor on the management of active phase labor pain & clients' satisfaction: a randomized controlled trial study.Global journal of health science · 2014Trial
- Assisting informed decision making for labour analgesia: a randomised controlled trial of a decision aid for labour analgesia versus a pamphlet.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2010Trial
- Anal sphincter lacerations and upright delivery postures--a risk analysis from a randomized controlled trial.International urogynecology journal and pelvic floor dysfunction · 2007Trial
- Influence of Physical Activity Including Squat Exposure on Trunk Muscle Strength and Labour Outcome in Pregnant Women.International journal of exercise science · 2024Article
- Maternal position during the second stage of labor and maternal-neonatal outcomes in nulliparous women: a retrospective cohort study.AJOG global reports · 2023Article
- Article
- Preventing urinary incontinence during pregnancy and postpartum: a review.International urogynecology journal · 2013Review
- Vacuum-assisted vaginal delivery.Reviews in obstetrics & gynecology · 2009Article
- Relationship between twin-to-twin delivery interval and umbilical artery acid-base status in the second twin.Journal of Korean medical science · 2007Article
- Vaginal speculum examinations without stirrups.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2006Article
- On the front line of primary health care: the profile of community health workers in rural Quechua communities in Peru.Human resources for health · 2006Article
- Evidence-informed obstetric practice during normal birth in China: trends and influences in four hospitals.BMC health services research · 2006Article
- The road to health care.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2004Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFor centuries, there has been controversy around whether being upright (sitting, birthing stools, chairs, squatting) or lying down have advantages for women delivering their babies.
objectivesTo 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). SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register (16 April 2003). SELECTION CRITERIA: 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. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently assessed the trials for inclusion and extracted the data. MAIN
resultsResults should be interpreted with caution as the methodological quality of the 19 included trials (5764 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 (10 trials: mean 4.29 minutes, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.95 to 5.64 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 (18 trials: relative risk (RR) 0.84, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.98); a reduction in episiotomies (12 trials: RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.91); 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 1.68, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.15); 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). REVIEWER'S
conclusionsThe 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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
14973980What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.