Trial reportBMC pregnancy and childbirth2011
No reduction in instrumental vaginal births and no increased risk for adverse perineal outcome in nulliparous women giving birth on a birth seat: results of a Swedish randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Maternal position in the second stage of labour for women with epidural anaesthesia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Position in the second stage of labour for women without epidural anaesthesia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Striving for scientific stringency: a re-analysis of a randomised controlled trial considering first-time mothers' obstetric outcomes in relation to birth position.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2012Trial
- Effects of Lateral Positions in Second-Stage Labour on Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes: An Observational Study Using Propensity Score Matching Analysis.International journal of nursing practice · 2026Observational
- Management of the third stage of labour by Basotho traditional birth attendants.Health SA = SA Gesondheid · 2024Article
- Effects of Using Sitting Position versus Lithotomy Position during the Second Stage of Labour on Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes and the Childbirth Experience of Chinese Women: A Prospective Cohort Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Aspects of Pelvic Floor Protection in Spontaneous Delivery - a Review.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2022Article
- A review and comparison of common maternal positions during the second-stage of labor.International journal of nursing sciences · 2019Review
- Intact Perineum: What are the Predictive Factors in Spontaneous Vaginal Birth?Materia socio-medica · 2019Article
- Birth position and obstetric anal sphincter injury: a population-based study of 113 000 spontaneous births.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2015Article
- Midwives' lived experience of a birth where the woman suffers an obstetric anal sphincter injury--a phenomenological study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2014Article
- Women's choice of positions during labour: return to the past or a modern way to give birth? A cohort study in Italy.BioMed research international · 2014Article
- Incidence of and risk factors for perineal trauma: a prospective observational study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe WHO advises against recumbent or supine position for longer periods during labour and birth and states that caregivers should encourage and support the woman to take the position in which she feels most comfortable. It has been suggested that upright positions may improve childbirth outcomes and reduce the risk for instrumental delivery; however RCTs of interventions to encourage upright positions are scarce. The aim of this study was to test, by means of a randomized controlled trial, the hypothesis that the use of a birthing seat during the second stage of labor, for healthy nulliparous women, decreases the number of instrumentally assisted births and may thus counterbalance any increase in perineal trauma and blood loss.
methodsA randomized controlled trial in Sweden where 1002 women were randomized to birth on a birth seat (experimental group) or birth in any other position (control group). Data were collected between November 2006 and July 2009. The primary outcome measurement was the number of instrumental deliveries. Secondary outcome measurements included perineal lacerations, perineal edema, maternal blood loss and hemoglobin. Analysis was by intention to treat.
resultsThe main findings of this study were that birth on the birth seat did not reduce the number of instrumental vaginal births, there was an increase in blood loss between 500 ml and 1000 ml in women who gave birth on the seat but no increase in bleeding over 1000 ml and no increase in perineal lacerations or perineal edema.
conclusionsThe birth seat did not reduce the number of instrumental vaginal births. The study confirmed an increased blood loss 500 ml - 1000 ml but not over 1000 ml for women giving birth on the seat. Giving birth on a birth seat caused no adverse consequences for perineal outcomes and may even be protective against episiotomies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.