首页> 外文OA文献 >Acupuncture with manual and electrical stimulation for labour pain : a two month follow up of recollection of pain and birth experience.
【2h】

Acupuncture with manual and electrical stimulation for labour pain : a two month follow up of recollection of pain and birth experience.

机译:针刺配合人工和电刺激治疗分娩痛:为期两个月的随访,以记录疼痛和生育经历。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

BACKGROUND: In a previous randomised controlled trial we showed that acupuncture with a combination of manual- and electrical stimulation (EA) did not affect the level of pain, as compared with acupuncture with manual stimulation (MA) and standard care (SC), but reduced the need for other forms of pain relief, including epidural analgesia. To dismiss an under-treatment of pain in the trial, we did a long-term follow up on the recollection of labour pain and the birth experience comparing acupuncture with manual stimulation, acupuncture with combined electrical and manual stimulation with standard care. Our hypothesis was that despite the lower frequency of use of other pain relief, women who had received EA would make similar retrospective assessments of labour pain and the birth experience 2 months after birth as women who received standard care (SC) or acupuncture with manual stimulation (MA). METHODS: Secondary analyses of data collected for a randomised controlled trial conducted at two delivery wards in Sweden. A total of 303 nulliparous women with normal pregnancies were randomised to: 40 min of MA or EA, or SC without acupuncture. Questionnaires were administered the day after partus and 2 months later. RESULTS: Two months postpartum, the mean recalled pain on the visual analogue scale (SC: 70.1, MA: 69.3 and EA: 68.7) did not differ between the groups (SC vs MA: adjusted mean difference 0.8, 95 % confidence interval [CI] -6.3 to 7.9 and SC vs EA: mean difference 1.3 CI 95 % -5.5 to 8.1). Positive birth experience (SC: 54.3 %, MA: 64.6 % and EA: 61.0 %) did not differ between the groups (SC vs MA: adjusted Odds Ratio [OR] 1.8, CI 95 % 0.9 to 3.7 and SC vs EA: OR 1.4 CI 95 % 0.7 to 2.6). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the lower use of other pain relief, women who received acupuncture with the combination of manual and electrical stimulation during labour made the same retrospective assessments of labour pain and birth experience 2 months postpartum as those who received acupuncture with manual stimulation or standard care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01197950.
机译:背景:在先前的一项随机对照试验中,我们显示,与手动刺激和标准护理(SC)相比,针刺结合手电刺激(EA)不会影响疼痛程度。减少了对其他形式的疼痛缓解需求,包括硬膜外镇痛。为了消除试验中对疼痛的治疗不足,我们对针刺与手法刺激,针刺与电刺激和手法刺激与标准护理相比较,对长期随访的工作痛和分娩经历进行了长期随访。我们的假设是,尽管使用其他止痛方法的频率较低,但接受EA的妇女与分娩标准护理(SC)或针刺并手工刺激的妇女相比,在分娩后2个月对分娩疼痛和分娩经历进行回顾性评估。 (嘛)。方法:对在瑞典的两个产房进行的随机对照试验收集的数据进行二次分析。总共303名正常妊娠的未生育妇女被随机分配至:40分钟的MA或EA或SC,无需针灸。产后第二天和两个月后进行问卷调查。结果:产后两个月,视觉模拟量表上的平均召回疼痛(SC:70.1,MA:69.3和EA:68.7)在两组之间没有差异(SC vs MA:调整后的平均差异0.8,95%置信区间[CI ] -6.3至7.9,SC与EA:平均差异1.3 CI 95%-5.5至8.1)。两组之间的阳性出生经历(SC:54.3%,MA:64.6%和EA:61.0%)没有差异(SC vs MA:调整后的赔率[OR] 1.8,CI 95%0.9至3.7,SC vs EA:OR 1.4 CI 95%0.7至2.6)。结论:尽管较少使用其他缓解疼痛的方法,但在分娩期间接受针刺结合手动和电刺激的妇女与在分娩后2个月接受针刺而接受手工刺激或标准护理的妇女进行了相同的回顾性评估,即分娩后的分娩痛和分娩经历。试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT01197950。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号