ArticleBMC nursing2024
Variability of clinical practice in the care of the second stage of labor among midwives in Spain.
Article in BMC nursing, 2024. 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, 1 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere are recommendations based on scientific evidence on care in the second stage of labor, but it is not known to what degree the professionals comply with these recommendations.
objectiveThe aim of this study is to examine the variability in clinical practices among midwives during the second stage of labor, including positions, mobility, practices, and the maximum time allowed before initiating active pushing, and to assess their adherence to clinical practice guidelines.
methodsA cross-sectional observational study. A self-designed questionnaire was developed and distributed online through scientific societies. The main variables studied were professional and work environment characteristics, maternal positions and mobility, practices during this stage, maximum time to start active pushing and duration of the second stage of labor. Descriptive statistics were calculated using SPSS 24.0.
resultsRegarding the woman's position during childbirth, 80.3% (245) of midwives frequently or always allow the woman to choose her birthing position. Furthermore, 44.6% (136) of professionals prefer using side-lying positions for the mother. Regarding drinking fluids during childbirth, 51.1% (156) of midwives allowed the woman to drink the amount of liquids she wanted, whereas 11.1% (34) said that they would allow them to do so however, this was against the protocol of their hospital. When inquiring about the Kristeller maneuver, it was reported to be excessively performed in 35.1% (107) of cases for fetal bradycardia, 33.1% (101) for maternal exhaustion, and 38.4% (117) to avoid instrumental birth. Finally, a great variability was observed in the time criteria used for the initiation of active pushing and the maximum duration of the second stage of labor.
conclusionsCertain practices, such as the Kristeller maneuver, are overused among midwives, with great variability in the use of certain procedures, the waiting times to initiate pushing and completion of the second stage of labor. Further training and awareness campaigns are needed for professionals to apply evidence-based care.
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.