持续枕后位胎儿的围产儿结局:系统回顾和荟萃分析

Elisa Giallongo, Angela C Webster
{"title":"持续枕后位胎儿的围产儿结局:系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Elisa Giallongo, Angela C Webster","doi":"10.12968/bjom.2024.32.2.88","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Persistent occiput posterior fetal position is the most common fetal malposition during labour. The aim of this study was to measure the magnitude of the effects of this labour dystocia on perinatal outcomes, as compared to anterior position. A systematic review of the literature included prospective and retrospective cohort studies of singleton term pregnancies, comparing the effect of occiput posterior fetal position with occiput anterior fetal position. Random-effect meta-analysis was performed. Overall, eight studies were included, for a total of 140 590 participants. Women with fetuses in occiput posterior position were more likely to give birth via caesarean section (odds ratio: 6.74, P<0.001), based on data from all eight studies. Newborns experienced an increased risk of admission to a neonatal intensive care unit (odds ratio: 1.60, P<0.001), based on data from five of the included studies. Persistent occiput posterior fetal position negatively affects maternal and neonatal outcomes. Future studies should reduce potential bias, include adjusted analysis and investigate the best clinical management for this labour dystocia.","PeriodicalId":52489,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Midwifery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perinatal outcomes in persistent occiput posterior fetal position: a systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Elisa Giallongo, Angela C Webster\",\"doi\":\"10.12968/bjom.2024.32.2.88\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Persistent occiput posterior fetal position is the most common fetal malposition during labour. The aim of this study was to measure the magnitude of the effects of this labour dystocia on perinatal outcomes, as compared to anterior position. A systematic review of the literature included prospective and retrospective cohort studies of singleton term pregnancies, comparing the effect of occiput posterior fetal position with occiput anterior fetal position. Random-effect meta-analysis was performed. Overall, eight studies were included, for a total of 140 590 participants. Women with fetuses in occiput posterior position were more likely to give birth via caesarean section (odds ratio: 6.74, P<0.001), based on data from all eight studies. Newborns experienced an increased risk of admission to a neonatal intensive care unit (odds ratio: 1.60, P<0.001), based on data from five of the included studies. Persistent occiput posterior fetal position negatively affects maternal and neonatal outcomes. Future studies should reduce potential bias, include adjusted analysis and investigate the best clinical management for this labour dystocia.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52489,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Midwifery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Midwifery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12968/bjom.2024.32.2.88\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Nursing\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Midwifery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12968/bjom.2024.32.2.88","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

持续枕后位是分娩过程中最常见的胎位不正。本研究的目的是测量与前置胎位相比,这种分娩难产对围产儿结局的影响程度。一项系统性的文献综述包括对单胎足月妊娠的前瞻性和回顾性队列研究,比较了枕后胎位和枕前胎位的影响。进行了随机效应荟萃分析。总共纳入了八项研究,参与人数达 140 590 人。根据所有八项研究的数据,胎儿枕后位的妇女更有可能通过剖腹产分娩(几率比:6.74,P<0.001)。根据五项纳入研究的数据,新生儿入住新生儿重症监护室的风险增加(几率比:1.60,P<0.001)。持续枕后位会对产妇和新生儿的预后产生负面影响。未来的研究应减少潜在的偏倚,纳入调整后的分析,并调查针对这种分娩难产的最佳临床处理方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Perinatal outcomes in persistent occiput posterior fetal position: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Persistent occiput posterior fetal position is the most common fetal malposition during labour. The aim of this study was to measure the magnitude of the effects of this labour dystocia on perinatal outcomes, as compared to anterior position. A systematic review of the literature included prospective and retrospective cohort studies of singleton term pregnancies, comparing the effect of occiput posterior fetal position with occiput anterior fetal position. Random-effect meta-analysis was performed. Overall, eight studies were included, for a total of 140 590 participants. Women with fetuses in occiput posterior position were more likely to give birth via caesarean section (odds ratio: 6.74, P<0.001), based on data from all eight studies. Newborns experienced an increased risk of admission to a neonatal intensive care unit (odds ratio: 1.60, P<0.001), based on data from five of the included studies. Persistent occiput posterior fetal position negatively affects maternal and neonatal outcomes. Future studies should reduce potential bias, include adjusted analysis and investigate the best clinical management for this labour dystocia.
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
British Journal of Midwifery
British Journal of Midwifery Nursing-Maternity and Midwifery
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
95
期刊介绍: British Journal of Midwifery (BJM) is the leading clinical journal for midwives. Published each month, the journal is written by midwives for midwives and peer reviewed by some of the foremost authorities in the profession. BJM is essential reading for all midwives. It contains the best clinical reviews, original research and evidence-based articles available, and ensures that midwives are kept fully up-to-date with the latest developments taking place in clinical practice. In addition, each issue of the journal contains a symposium on a particular theme, providing more in-depth clinical information.
期刊最新文献
Breast self-examination among community midwife and lady health visitor students in Pakistan An evidence-based nipple care pathway for new breastfeeding mothers: a Delphi study Cultivating patient safety culture in midwifery practices through incident reporting Supporting the older midwifery workforce Molar pregnancy: a qualitative study of personal experiences and societal narratives of loss
×
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