SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012
Position in the second stage of labour for women without epidural anaesthesia.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07411352 (Left Lateral Position Versus Supine Position in Reducing the Duration of the Active Phase of Labor), which is not on this map. Cited by 52 papers, 14 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.
Left Lateral Position Versus Supine Position in Reducing the Duration of the Active Phase of Labor: A Randomized, Single-Blind Clinical Trial
Who cites it
52 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 167 citations in OpenAlex.
- Maternal Positioning in the Second Stage of Labour and its Relationship with Perineal Trauma: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.International urogynecology journal · 2026Pooled it
- Paracetamol/acetaminophen (single administration) for perineal pain in the early postpartum period.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Maternal, obstetrical and neonatal risk factors' impact on female urinary incontinence: a systematic review.International urogynecology journal · 2020Pooled it
- Effect of maternal birth positions on duration of second stage of labor: systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2019Pooled it
- Perineal techniques during the second stage of labour for reducing perineal trauma.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Position in the second stage of labour for women without epidural anaesthesia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Pushing/bearing down methods for the second stage of labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Fundal pressure during the second stage of labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Position in the second stage of labour for women with epidural anaesthesia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Does the Finnish intervention prevent obstetric anal sphincter injuries? A systematic review of the literature.BMJ open · 2015Pooled it
- Maternal positions and mobility during first stage labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Antenatal perineal massage for reducing perineal trauma.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Pain management for women in labour: an overview of systematic reviews.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- Maternal positions and mobility during first stage labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2009Pooled it
- Methodological challenges and solution strategies during implementation of a midwife-led multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) in maternity hospitals.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Trial
- Upright versus lying down position in second stage of labour in nulliparous women with low dose epidural: BUMPES randomised controlled trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2017Trial
- Trial
- 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
- A randomized trial of birthing with and without stirrups.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2012Trial
- 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.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2011Trial
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
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, kneeling) 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 uterine cervix). SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Trials Register (28 February 2012). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials of any upright or lateral position assumed by pregnant women during the second stage of labour compared with supine or lithotomy positions. Secondary comparisons include comparison of different upright positions and the lateral position. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and assessed trial quality. At least two review authors extracted the data. Data were checked for accuracy. MAIN
resultsResults should be interpreted with caution as the methodological quality of the 22 included trials (7280 women) was variable.In all women studied (primigravid and multigravid) there was a non-significant reduction in duration of second stage in the upright group (mean difference (MD) -3.71 minutes; 95% confidence interval (CI) -8.78 to 1.37 minutes; 10 trials, 3485 women; random-effects, I(2) = 94%), a significant reduction in assisted deliveries (risk ratio (RR) 0.78; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.90; 19 trials, 6024 women, I(2)= 27%), a reduction in episiotomies (average RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.90, 12 trials, 4541 women; random-effects, I(2) = 7%), an increase in second degree perineal tears (RR 1.35; 95% CI 1.20 to 1.51, 14 trials, 5367 women), increased estimated blood loss greater than 500 ml (RR 1.65; 95% CI 1.32 to 2.60; 13 trials, 5158 women, asymmetric funnel plot indicating publication bias), fewer abnormal fetal heart rate patterns (RR 0.46; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.93; two trials, 617 women). In primigravid women the use of any upright compared with supine positions was associated with: non-significant reduction in duration of second stage of labour (nine trials: mean 3.24 minutes, 95% CI 1.53 to 4.95 minutes) - this reduction was largely due to women allocated to the use of the birth cushion. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThe findings of this review suggest several possible benefits for upright posture in women without epidural, but with the possibility of increased risk of blood loss greater than 500 mL. Until such time as the benefits and risks of various delivery positions are estimated with greater certainty, when methodologically stringent data from trials are available, women should be allowed to make choices about the birth positions in which they might wish to assume for birth of their babies.
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.