Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34503471›Full record

Observational studyBMC pregnancy and childbirth2021

Coexistence and prevalence of obstetric interventions: an analysis based on the grade of membership.

Karina Cristina Rouwe de Souza, Thales Philipe Rodrigues da Silva, Ana Kelve de Castro Damasceno, Bruna Figueiredo Manzo, Kleyde Ventura de Souza, Maria Margarida Leitão Filipe, Fernanda Penido Matozinhos

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. The condemned fundal pressure maneuver: time to reconsider?Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Karina Cristina Rouwe de SouzaGraduate Nursing Program, Nursing School, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte City, Minas Gerais State, Brazil.
Thales Philipe Rodrigues da SilvaHealth Sciences, Child and Adolescent Health, Medical School, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte City, Minas Gerais State, Brazil.
Ana Kelve de Castro DamascenoUniversidade Federal do Ceará, Ceará State, Fortaleza City, Brazil.
Bruna Figueiredo ManzoMaternal and Child Nursing and Public Health Department, Nursing School, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte City, Minas Gerais State, Brazil.
Kleyde Ventura de SouzaMaternal and Child Nursing and Public Health Department, Nursing School, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte City, Minas Gerais State, Brazil.
Maria Margarida Leitão FilipeNursing - Matosinhos Health Unit, Matosinhos , Portugal.
Fernanda Penido MatozinhosMaternal and Child Nursing and Public Health Department, Nursing School, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte City, Minas Gerais State, Brazil. nandapenido@hotmail.com.
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais · BRUniversidade Federal do Ceará · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundObstetric interventions performed during delivery do not reflect improvements in obstetric care. Several practices routinely performed during childbirth, without any scientific evidence or basis - such as Kristeller maneuver, routine episiotomy, and movement or feeding restriction - reflect a disrespectful assistance reality that, unfortunately, remains in place in Brazil. The aims of the current study are to assess the coexistence and prevalence of obstetric interventions in maternity hospitals in Belo Horizonte City, based on the Grade of Membership (GoM) method, as well as to investigate sociodemographic and obstetric factors associated with coexistence profiles generated by it.

methodsObservational study, based on a cross-sectional design, carried out with data deriving from the study "Nascer em Belo Horizonte: Inquérito sobre o Parto e Nascimento" (Born in Belo Horizonte: Survey on Childbirth and Birth). The herein investigated interventions comprised practices that are clearly useful and should be encouraged; practices that are clearly harmful or ineffective and should be eliminated; and practices that are inappropriately used, in contrast to the ones recommended by the World Health Organization. The analyzed interventions comprised: providing food to parturient women, allowing them to have freedom to move, use of partogram, adopting non-pharmacological methods for pain relief, enema, perineal shaving, lying patients down for delivery, Kristeller maneuver, amniotomy, oxytocin infusion, analgesia and episiotomy. The current study has used GoM to identify the coexistence of the adopted obstetric interventions. Variables such as age, schooling, skin color, primigravida, place-of-delivery financing, number of prenatal consultations, gestational age at delivery, presence of obstetric nurse at delivery time, paid work and presence of companion during delivery were taken into consideration at the time to build patients' profile.

resultsResults have highlighted two antagonistic obstetric profiles, namely: profile 1 comprised parturient women who were offered diet, freedom to move, use of partogram, using non-pharmacological methods for pain relief, giving birth in lying position, patients who were not subjected to Kristeller maneuver, episiotomy or amniotomy, women did not receive oxytocin infusion, and analgesia using. Profile 2, in its turn, comprised parturient women who were not offered diet, who were not allowed to have freedom to move, as well as who did not use the partograph or who were subjected to non-pharmacological methods for pain relief. They were subjected to enema, perineal shaving, Kristeller maneuver, amniotomy and oxytocin infusion. In addition, they underwent analgesia and episiotomy. This outcome emphasizes the persistence of an obstetric care model that is not based on scientific evidence. Based on the analysis of factors that influenced the coexistence of obstetric interventions, the presence of obstetric nurses in the healthcare practice has reduced the likelihood of parturient women to belong to profile 2. In addition, childbirth events that took place in public institutions have reduced the likelihood of parturient women to belong to profile 2. CONCLUSION(S): Based on the analysis of factors that influenced the coexistence of obstetric interventions, financing the hospital for childbirth has increased the likelihood of parturient women to belong to profile 2. However, the likelihood of parturient women to belong to profile 2 has decreased when hospitals had an active obstetric nurse at the delivery room. The current study has contributed to discussions about obstetric interventions, as well as to improve childbirth assistance models. In addition, it has emphasized the need of developing strategies focused on adherence to, and implementation of, assistance models based on scientific evidence.

Indexed as

Labor, ObstetricParturitionAdultBrazilCross-Sectional StudiesDelivery, ObstetricFemaleHospitals, MaternityHumansPregnancyBirthHumanized DeliveryLaborObstetric NursingObstetricsParturition

Identifiers

PMID34503471
PMCPMC8431849
OpenAlexW3198239122

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.