Volume 6, Issue 3 (Winter 2021)
SJNMP 2021, 6(3): 88-96 |
Back to browse issues page
1- Saveh School of Medical Sciences , mehrangize_rezai@yahoo.com
2- Saveh School of Medical Sciences
3- Hamadan University of Medical Sciences
2- Saveh School of Medical Sciences
3- Hamadan University of Medical Sciences
Abstract: (1577 Views)
Background & Aim: The quality of support a mother receives from a companion midwife during labor plays an important role in maintaining the health of all family members. Therefore, the present study aimed to evaluate the relationship between the attendance of a companion midwife (DULLA) and maternal and neonatal consequences.
Materials &Methods: This research implemented during 2013-2018. The research population included mothers referring to the maternity wards of hospitals in Saveh, Iran. The participants were selected based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria related to the maternal and neonatal consequences of childbirth. In addition, data analysis was carried out using descriptive and inferential statistics.
Results: In this research, no significant difference was observed between the groups in terms of demographic characteristics. However, there was a significant difference between the groups in terms of the type of childbirth, and the number of natural deliveries was higher in the case group (P=0.001). Moreover, the duration of the active phase of the first and second stages of labor was less in the control group, compared to the other group (P=0.001). Similarly, post-partum delivery was lower in the control group and there was a significant difference between the groups in this regard (P=0.001). Nevertheless, no significant difference was observed between the groups regarding the initiation of lactation within one hour of birth (P=0.08).
Materials &Methods: This research implemented during 2013-2018. The research population included mothers referring to the maternity wards of hospitals in Saveh, Iran. The participants were selected based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria related to the maternal and neonatal consequences of childbirth. In addition, data analysis was carried out using descriptive and inferential statistics.
Results: In this research, no significant difference was observed between the groups in terms of demographic characteristics. However, there was a significant difference between the groups in terms of the type of childbirth, and the number of natural deliveries was higher in the case group (P=0.001). Moreover, the duration of the active phase of the first and second stages of labor was less in the control group, compared to the other group (P=0.001). Similarly, post-partum delivery was lower in the control group and there was a significant difference between the groups in this regard (P=0.001). Nevertheless, no significant difference was observed between the groups regarding the initiation of lactation within one hour of birth (P=0.08).
Conclusion: According to the results of the study, the attendance of a companion midwife improved some of the childbirth consequences. Therefore, it is recommended that more research be conducted in this field of the health system and the necessary corrective interventions be carried out in this respect.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2020/08/15 | Revised: 2021/03/1 | Accepted: 2020/10/18 | Published: 2021/01/29 | ePublished: 2021/01/29
Received: 2020/08/15 | Revised: 2021/03/1 | Accepted: 2020/10/18 | Published: 2021/01/29 | ePublished: 2021/01/29
References
1. Umeora J, Ukkaegbe OU, Eze CI, Masekoameng JN, Kelly A. Spousal companionship in labor in an urban facility in south east Nigeria. Anatolian Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2011; 2: 1-5.
2. Noorbala AA. Psychosocial health and ways to improve it Iranian. Journal of Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology, Vol. 17, No. 2, Summer 2011, 151-156 (Persian).
3. Barakzai A, Haider G, Yousuf F, Haider A, Muhammad N. Awareness of women regarding analgesia during labour. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad 2010; 22(1): 73-75 (Persian).
4. Jafari E, Mohebi P, Sedaghatpisheh T, Mazloomzadeh S. Comparison of Personal Control and Its Related Factors, Pain and Labor Outcomes in Physiological and Routine Childbirth Groups. Rafsanjan Univ Med Sci. 2015; 14(12): 1033-48(Persian).
5. Reeder M, Honiak G. Maternity Nursing: family, newborn and Womens health care, 18th ed. The United State, 1997:557.
6. James DK, Steer PJ, Weiner CP, Gonik B. High Risk Pregnancy: Management [10]Options - Expert Consult: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2010.
7. Cunningham fAFG, Leveno KJ, Bloom SL, Hauth JC, Rouse D, Spong CY. Gant Nf, et al. Williams Obstetrics. 23th ed. Newyork: McGraw Hill Professional; Volum 1.Newyork: Mc Graw Hill; 2014. Pp.252,426,428,443.
8. Hodnett ED, Gates S, Hofmeyr GJ, Sakala C, Weston J. Continuous support [6]for women during childbirth. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2011;(2):Cd003766. [DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD003766.pub3]
9. Silva RM, Barros NF, Jorge HM, Melo LP, Ferreira Junior AR. Qualitative evidence of monitoring by doulas during labor and childbirth. Cien Saude Colet. 2012 Oct; 17(10): 2783-94. [DOI:10.1590/S1413-81232012001000026]
10. Essex HN, Pickett KE. Mothers without companionship during childbirth: an analysis within the millennium cohort study. Birth 2008; 35(4):266-76. [DOI:10.1111/j.1523-536X.2008.00253.x]
11. Bohren MA, Hofmeyr GJ, Sakala C, Fukuzawa RK, Cuthbert A.Continuous support for women during childbirth.Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews2017, Issue 7. Art. No.: CD003766.DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003766.pub6 [DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD003766.pub6]
12. Hodnett ED, Frederick S, Weston J. Support during pregnancy for women at increased risk of low birsweight babies. Cochrane Databas Syst Rev.2010 Jun 16(6). [DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD000198.pub2]
13. Paterno MT, Van Zandt SE, Murphy J, Jordan ET. Evaluation of a student-nurse doula program: an analysis of doula interventions and their impact on labor analgesia and cesarean birth. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2012 Jan-Feb; 57(1): 28-34. [DOI:10.1111/j.1542-2011.2011.00091.x]
14. Akhavan S, Lundgren I. Midwives' experiences of doula support for immigrant women in Sweden-a qualitative study. Midwifery. 2012 Feb; 28(1): 80-5. [DOI:10.1016/j.midw.2010.11.004]
15. Sangestani G, Khatiban M, Pourolajal J Oshvandi Kh. Influence of Doula on the Primiparous Parturients' Anxiety in the Delivery Ward. Journal of School of Nursing and Midwifery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences (HAYAT).2014; 19(4): 48-60.
16. Campbell-Voytal K, Fry McComish J, Visger JM, Rowland CA, Kelleher J. Postpartum doulas: motivations and perceptions of practice. Midwifery 2011; 27(6):e214-21 [DOI:10.1016/j.midw.2010.09.006]
17. Hodnett ED, Gates S, Hofmeyr GJ, Sakala C, Weston J. Continuous support for women during childbirth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011;(2):CD003766 [DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD003766.pub3]
18. Fortier JH, Godwin M. Doula support compared with standard care. Meta-analysis of the effects on the rate of medical interventions during labour for low-risk women delivering at term. Can Fam Physician 2015; 61(6):e284-92.
19. Samieizadeh Toosi T, Sereshti M, Dashipur AR, Mohammadinia N, Arzani A. The effect of supportive companionship on length of labor and desire to breastfeed in primiparous women. Journalof Urmia Nursing And Midwifery Faculty 2011;9(4): 262-69(Persian).
20. Lundgren I. Swedish women's experiences of doula support during childbirth. Midwifery 2010; 26(2):173-80. [DOI:10.1016/j.midw.2008.05.002]
21. Hodnett ED, Gates S, Hofmeyer GJ, Skala C. Continuous support for women during childbirth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011; (2): CD003766. [DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD003766.pub3]
22. Dadshahi S, Tork Zahrani SH, Ganati Ataee P, Nasiri M. Does maternal continuous support BY midwife change the outcome of childbirth? Iranian Journal of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Infertility 2018;20(12):67-76(Persian).
23. Nommsen-Rivers LA, Mastergeorge AM, Hansen RL, Cullum AS, Dewey KG. Doula care, early breastfeeding outcomes, and breastfeeding status at 6 weeks postpartum among low‐income primiparae. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 2009; 38(2):157-73. [DOI:10.1111/j.1552-6909.2009.01005.x]
24. Pazandeh F, Huss R, Hirst J, House A, Baghban AA. An evaluation of the quality of care for women with low risk pregnanacy: the use of evidence-based practice during labour and childbirth in four public hospitals in Tehran. Midwifery 2015; 31(11):1045-1053(Persian). [DOI:10.1016/j.midw.2015.07.003]
25. Rasouli M, Keramat A, Khosravi A, Mohabat PZ. Prevalence and factors associated with episiotomy in Shahroud City, northeast of Iran. Int J Womens Health Reprod Sci 2016; 4(3):125-9(Persian). [DOI:10.15296/ijwhr.2016.29]
26. Tork Zahrani SH, Karamollahi Z, Azgoli G, Akbarpur Baghian A, Sheikhan Z. Effect of support from the mothers with positive breast feeding experience on breast feeding pattern and duration among primiparous women referred to maternityward of Ilam hospital, 2010. J Ilam Univ Med Sci 2012; 20(2):9-16 (Persian).
27. Khavandizadeh Aghdam S, Kazemzadeh R, Nikjoo R. The effect of the doula support during labor on delivery length in primigravida women. Iran J Obstet Gynecol Infertil 2015;18(150): 8-13. (Persian).
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |