ArticleSAGE open nursing
Enema Administration During Labor: Pregnant Women's Perspective and Knowledge.
Article in SAGE open nursing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Current evidence does not support the routine use of rectal enemas (REs) because they have not been associated with reduced rates of puerperal infection, degree of perineal tear, or duration of labor. A recent literature review recognized knowledge gaps regarding the uses of RE during labor including women's perceptions, pain, and satisfaction. Objectives: To report pregnant women's knowledge, attitudes, perceptions, pain, and satisfaction associated with the use of RE during labor. Methods: A prospective study was conducted between 20 October 2019 and 20 October 2020. Women were included if they were 37 weeks or more pregnant, had a viable pregnancy, were admitted in labor, and had an RE. Characteristic data and data about knowledge, perceptions, attitudes, pain, and satisfaction associated with its use were recorded. Women were regrouped based on their level of knowledge into low- and high-level groups. Attitudes, perceptions, inconveniences, pain, and satisfaction were regrouped into two categories: low and high on the Likert scale. Results: A total of 300 women were recruited, with means (SD) for age and gestational age of 27.8 (4.8) years, and 40 (1.1) weeks, respectively, and 45.7% were knowledgeable or very knowledgeable, 76% had a positive attitude, and 88.7% perceived enemas as important. The mean scores (SD) for pain and satisfaction as measured on visual analogue scales were 1.5 (1.8) and 5.4 (1.8), respectively. Women with high knowledge about RE were older and multiparous. Recruited women were more likely to report lower inconvenience and pain scores and higher satisfaction scores (all Conclusion: Most recruited women were knowledgeable about REs, perceived them as important, and expressed a positive attitude toward their administration. The low levels of inconvenience, pain, and complications and the high satisfaction rates may be used when counseling women about when an RE is required during labor.
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.