参与 STan 澳大利亚随机对照试验 (START) 的一组人群的社会心理结果

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 NURSING Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care Pub Date : 2024-02-02 DOI:10.1111/birt.12815
Madeleine Benton PhD, Amy Salter PhD, Chris Wilkinson MPH, FRACOG, Bronni Simpson PhD, Deborah Turnbull PhD
{"title":"参与 STan 澳大利亚随机对照试验 (START) 的一组人群的社会心理结果","authors":"Madeleine Benton PhD,&nbsp;Amy Salter PhD,&nbsp;Chris Wilkinson MPH, FRACOG,&nbsp;Bronni Simpson PhD,&nbsp;Deborah Turnbull PhD","doi":"10.1111/birt.12815","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>In an Australian randomized controlled trial (RCT), two techniques for intrapartum fetal surveillance were compared: ST analysis (STan) as an adjunct to cardiotocography (CTG), compared with CTG alone. The aim was to determine whether CTG + STan could reduce emergency cesarean birth rates while maintaining or improving neonatal outcomes. Secondary aims were to compare clinical, economic, and psychosocial outcomes. The purpose of this paper was to present psychosocial outcomes from one cohort enrolled in the trial.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>The study was conducted at one tertiary referral hospital. Participants who had taken part in the trial from the outset were invited to complete a questionnaire between March 2018 and January 2020, approximately 8 weeks after giving birth. Outcomes included depression, psychological distress, health-related quality of life, and infant feeding practices. Analysis was by intention to treat.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p><i>N</i> = 207/527 participants completed the questionnaire (<i>n</i> = 113, STan; <i>n</i> = 94, CTG alone). Overall, no statistically significant or clinically meaningful differences were found in the two groups for symptoms of depression, psychological distress, quality of life, or infant feeding. A statistically significant difference was observed for the subscale of pain-discomfort, where scores were higher on average in the CTG alone arm relative to that in the CTG + STan arm.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Although STan as an adjunct to CTG constitutes a different clinical technology from CTG alone, both monitoring types appeared to produce similar results in terms of postnatal psychosocial outcomes for women. Findings from this study provide service users and staff with a comprehensive assessment of STan that can be used to make evidence-informed decisions about monitoring options should STan become more widely available.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":55350,"journal":{"name":"Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care","volume":"51 3","pages":"595-601"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/birt.12815","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Psychosocial outcomes from one cohort participating in the STan Australian Randomised controlled Trial (START)\",\"authors\":\"Madeleine Benton PhD,&nbsp;Amy Salter PhD,&nbsp;Chris Wilkinson MPH, FRACOG,&nbsp;Bronni Simpson PhD,&nbsp;Deborah Turnbull PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/birt.12815\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>In an Australian randomized controlled trial (RCT), two techniques for intrapartum fetal surveillance were compared: ST analysis (STan) as an adjunct to cardiotocography (CTG), compared with CTG alone. The aim was to determine whether CTG + STan could reduce emergency cesarean birth rates while maintaining or improving neonatal outcomes. Secondary aims were to compare clinical, economic, and psychosocial outcomes. The purpose of this paper was to present psychosocial outcomes from one cohort enrolled in the trial.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>The study was conducted at one tertiary referral hospital. Participants who had taken part in the trial from the outset were invited to complete a questionnaire between March 2018 and January 2020, approximately 8 weeks after giving birth. Outcomes included depression, psychological distress, health-related quality of life, and infant feeding practices. Analysis was by intention to treat.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p><i>N</i> = 207/527 participants completed the questionnaire (<i>n</i> = 113, STan; <i>n</i> = 94, CTG alone). Overall, no statistically significant or clinically meaningful differences were found in the two groups for symptoms of depression, psychological distress, quality of life, or infant feeding. A statistically significant difference was observed for the subscale of pain-discomfort, where scores were higher on average in the CTG alone arm relative to that in the CTG + STan arm.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>Although STan as an adjunct to CTG constitutes a different clinical technology from CTG alone, both monitoring types appeared to produce similar results in terms of postnatal psychosocial outcomes for women. Findings from this study provide service users and staff with a comprehensive assessment of STan that can be used to make evidence-informed decisions about monitoring options should STan become more widely available.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55350,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care\",\"volume\":\"51 3\",\"pages\":\"595-601\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/birt.12815\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/birt.12815\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/birt.12815","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在澳大利亚的一项随机对照试验(RCT)中,对两种产前胎儿监护技术进行了比较:ST分析(STan)作为心动图(CTG)的辅助手段与单独使用CTG进行比较。目的是确定 CTG + STan 能否降低紧急剖宫产率,同时保持或改善新生儿预后。次要目的是比较临床、经济和社会心理结果。本文旨在介绍参与试验的一个队列的社会心理结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Psychosocial outcomes from one cohort participating in the STan Australian Randomised controlled Trial (START)

Background

In an Australian randomized controlled trial (RCT), two techniques for intrapartum fetal surveillance were compared: ST analysis (STan) as an adjunct to cardiotocography (CTG), compared with CTG alone. The aim was to determine whether CTG + STan could reduce emergency cesarean birth rates while maintaining or improving neonatal outcomes. Secondary aims were to compare clinical, economic, and psychosocial outcomes. The purpose of this paper was to present psychosocial outcomes from one cohort enrolled in the trial.

Methods

The study was conducted at one tertiary referral hospital. Participants who had taken part in the trial from the outset were invited to complete a questionnaire between March 2018 and January 2020, approximately 8 weeks after giving birth. Outcomes included depression, psychological distress, health-related quality of life, and infant feeding practices. Analysis was by intention to treat.

Results

N = 207/527 participants completed the questionnaire (n = 113, STan; n = 94, CTG alone). Overall, no statistically significant or clinically meaningful differences were found in the two groups for symptoms of depression, psychological distress, quality of life, or infant feeding. A statistically significant difference was observed for the subscale of pain-discomfort, where scores were higher on average in the CTG alone arm relative to that in the CTG + STan arm.

Conclusions

Although STan as an adjunct to CTG constitutes a different clinical technology from CTG alone, both monitoring types appeared to produce similar results in terms of postnatal psychosocial outcomes for women. Findings from this study provide service users and staff with a comprehensive assessment of STan that can be used to make evidence-informed decisions about monitoring options should STan become more widely available.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care
Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
4.00%
发文量
90
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Birth: Issues in Perinatal Care is a multidisciplinary, refereed journal devoted to issues and practices in the care of childbearing women, infants, and families. It is written by and for professionals in maternal and neonatal health, nurses, midwives, physicians, public health workers, doulas, social scientists, childbirth educators, lactation counselors, epidemiologists, and other health caregivers and policymakers in perinatal care.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information A History of Cesarean Birth as a Risk Factor for Postpartum Hemorrhage Even After Successful Planned Vaginal Birth. Pregnant Women's Care Needs During Early Labor-A Scoping Review. Sociodemographic and Health-Related Risk Factors Associated With Planned and Emergency Cesarean Births in Mexico. Validating the Quality Maternal and Newborn Care Framework Index: A Global Tool for Quality-of-Care Evaluations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1