Choose your font:
 Arimo
 Merriweather
 Mukta Malar
 Open Sans Condensed
 Rokkitt
 Source Sans Pro
 Login


 English 
 Français 
 Português 
 Español 

[Valid RSS] RSS
bar

Database - (CIANE)

Description of this bibliographical database (CIANE website)
Currently 3111 records
YouTube channel (tutorial)

https://ciane.net/id=2320

Created on : 31 Mar 2009
Modified on : 31 Mar 2009

 Modify this record
Do not follow this link unless you know an editor’s password!


Share: Facebook logo   Tweeter logo   Easy

Bibliographical entry (without author) :

Effect of food intake during labour on obstetric outcome: randomised controlled trial

Author(s) :

Geraldine O’Sullivan, Bing Liu,Darren Hart, Paul Seed, Andrew Shennan

Year of publication :

2009

URL(s) :

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/338/mar24_2/b7…
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b784

Résumé (français)  :

Objectifs: évaluer les effets de l’alimentation pendant le travail sur les résultats obstétriques et néonataux

Lieu: centre de naissance (birth center) dans un hôpital (teaching hospital) de Londres

Participants: 2426 femmes nullipares, non diabétiques, à terme, singleton en présentation céphalique, en cours de travail, à moins de 6 cm de dilatation

Intervention: consommation de nourriture légère ou d’eau pendant le travail

Mesures: la mesure principale est le taux de naissance vaginale spontanée. Les autres mesures comprennent: la durée du travail, le besoin d’accélaration du travail, les taux d’intervention instrumentales et césariennes, l’incidence des vomissements, et les résultats néonataux

Résultats: le taux d’accouchement vaginale spontané est le même dans les deux groupes (44% ; risque relatif 0.99, 95% intervalle de confiance 0.90 à 1.08). On n’a pas trouvé de différence cliniquement importante pour: la durée du travail (moyenne géométrique: nourriture 597 minutes, contre 612 minutes pour l’eau ratio of geometric means 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.93 to 1.03) ; le taux de césariennes (30% v 30%; relative risk 0.99, 0.87 to 1.12) ou l’incidence des vomissements (35% v 34%; relative risk 1.05, 0.9 to 1.2). Les résultats néonataux sont aussi similaires.

Conclusions: la consommation de nourriture légère pendant le travail n’a pas eu d’impact sur les résultats obstétriques ou néonataux des participantes, et n’a pas non plus augmenté l’incidence des vomissements. Les femmes autorisées à manger pendant le travail ont des durées de travail et des taux de naissances instrumentales similaires à celles qui sont uniquement autorisées à boire.

Abstract (English)  :

Objective To investigate the effect of feeding during labour on obstetric and neonatal outcomes.
Design Prospective randomised controlled trial.

Setting Birth centre in London teaching hospital.

Participants 2426 nulliparous, non-diabetic women at term, with a singleton cephalic presenting fetus and in labour with a cervical dilatation of less than 6 cm.

Intervention Consumption of a light diet or water during labour.

Main outcome measures The primary outcome measure was spontaneous vaginal delivery rate. Other outcomes measured included duration of labour, need for augmentation of labour, instrumental and caesarean delivery rates, incidence of vomiting, and neonatal outcome.

Results The spontaneous vaginal delivery rate was the same in both groups (44%; relative risk 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.90 to 1.08). No clinically important differences were found in the duration of labour (geometric mean: eating, 597 min v water, 612 min; ratio of geometric means 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.93 to 1.03), the caesarean delivery rate (30% v 30%; relative risk 0.99, 0.87 to 1.12), or the incidence of vomiting (35% v 34%; relative risk 1.05, 0.9 to 1.2). Neonatal outcomes were also similar.

Conclusions Consumption of a light diet during labour did not influence obstetric or neonatal outcomes in participants, nor did it increase the incidence of vomiting. Women who are allowed to eat in labour have similar lengths of labour and operative delivery rates to those allowed water only.

Sumário (português)  :

Resumen (español)  :

Comments :

Argument (français) :

Argument (English):

Argumento (português):

Argumento (español):

Keywords :

➡ c-section/caesarean ; duration of labour ; guidelines ; instrumental delivery ; diet/nutrition ; birth plan ; informed consent ; dilation

Author of this record :

Emmanuelle Phan — 31 Mar 2009
➡ latest update : Bernard Bel — 31 Mar 2009

Discussion (display only in English)
 
➡ Only identified users



 I have read the guidelines of discussions and I accept all terms
[Hide guidelines]

➡ Discussion guidelines

1) Comments aim at clarifying the content of the publication or suggesting links for a better comprehension of its topic
2) All comments are public and opinions expressed belong to their authors
3) Avoid casual talk and personal stories
4) Any off-topic comment or containing inappropriate statements will be deleted without notice

barre

New expert query --- New simple query

Creating new record --- Importing records

User management --- Dump database --- Contact

bar

This database created by Alliance francophone pour l'accouchement respecté (AFAR) is managed
by Collectif interassociatif autour de la naissance (CIANE, https://ciane.net).
It is fed by the voluntary contributions of persons interested in the sharing of scientific data.
If you agree with this project, you can support us in several ways:
(1) contributing to this database if you have a minimum training in documentation
(2) or financially supporting CIANE (see below)
(3) or joining any society affiliated with CIANE.
Sign in or create an account to follow changes or become an editor.
Contact bibli(arobase)ciane.net for more information.

Valid CSS! Valid HTML!
Donating to CIANE (click “Faire un don”) will help us to maintain and develop sites and public
databases towards the support of parents and caregivers’ informed decisions with respect to childbirth