Effects of flexible sacrum position at birth on maternal and neonatal outcomes: A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE To examine the differences in both maternal and neonatal outcomes between flexible and non-flexible sacrum positions at birth. METHODS A descriptive, cross-sectional, retrospective study was carried out on a sample of low-risk pregnant women. Univariate and multivariate logistic regressions and multivariate linear regressions were conducted to estimate the association between our discrete or continuous variables of interest. Maternal outcomes were perineal tear, maternal blood loss, second stage length; neonatal outcomes were Apgar scores and neonatal asphyxia. Results were adjusted for maternal age, neonatal birth weight, and epidural analgesia. RESULTS We considered for final analysis 2198 women. In primiparous women, women giving birth in the all-fours position were significantly more likely to have an intact perineum (P = 0.011) and a shorter length of the second stage of labor (P = 0.022). Maternal age (P = 0.005) and neonatal weight (P = 0.013) significantly increased perineal tearing; maternal age (P = 0.004) and neonatal birth weight (P < 0.001) were significantly associated with a higher amount of blood loss. Maternal age (P = 0.002) and neonatal weight (P < 0.001) significantly increased the length of the second stage of labor. For multiparous women, the side-lying position was significantly correlated with an intact perineum (P = 0.031); maternal age and intact perineum were statistically inversely associated. Epidural analgesia significantly increased the length of the second stage of labor in both nulliparous (P < 0.001) and pluriparous women (P < 0.001). No significant differences were found in neonatal outcomes. CONCLUSION Women with a low-risk labor should be free to choose their birth position as flexible sacrum positions are shown to increase maternal well-being and do not affect neonatal health.

[1]  J. Buján,et al.  Risk Factors in Third and Fourth Degree Perineal Tears in Women in a Tertiary Centre: An Observational Ambispective Cohort Study , 2021, Journal of personalized medicine.

[2]  Hong Lu,et al.  Effects of flexible sacrum positions during the second stage of labour on maternal and neonatal outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2020, Journal of clinical nursing.

[3]  Hong Lu,et al.  The effects of hands on and hands off/poised techniques on maternal outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2020, Midwifery.

[4]  A. Aviram,et al.  The impact of epidural analgesia on the duration of the second stage of labor , 2018, Birth.

[5]  J. Thornton,et al.  Maternal position in the second stage of labour for women with epidural anaesthesia. , 2018, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[6]  P. Vergani,et al.  Incidence and risk factors of third- and fourth-degree perineal tears in a single Italian scenario. , 2018, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[7]  U. Waldenström,et al.  Risk of obstetric anal sphincter injury increases with maternal age irrespective of parity: a population-based register study , 2017, BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth.

[8]  W. Cai,et al.  A randomised controlled trial in comparing maternal and neonatal outcomes between hands-and-knees delivery position and supine position in China. , 2017, Midwifery.

[9]  M. Lukasse,et al.  Perineal techniques during the second stage of labour for reducing perineal trauma. , 2017, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[10]  G. Hofmeyr,et al.  Position in the second stage of labour for women without epidural anaesthesia. , 2017, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[11]  Hong Jiang,et al.  Selective versus routine use of episiotomy for vaginal birth , 2017, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[12]  I. Hildingsson,et al.  Perineal injuries and birth positions among 2992 women with a low risk pregnancy who opted for a homebirth , 2016, BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth.

[13]  D. Doherty,et al.  Risk factors for severe perineal trauma during vaginal childbirth: a Western Australian retrospective cohort study. , 2015, Women and birth : journal of the Australian College of Midwives.

[14]  V. Schmied,et al.  Maternal and perinatal outcomes amongst low risk women giving birth in water compared to six birth positions on land. A descriptive cross sectional study in a birth centre over 12 years. , 2013, Midwifery.

[15]  E. Hodnett,et al.  Repeated hands-and-knees positioning during labour: a randomized pilot study , 2013, PeerJ.

[16]  H. Priddis,et al.  What are the facilitators, inhibitors, and implications of birth positioning? A review of the literature. , 2012, Women and birth : journal of the Australian College of Midwives.

[17]  L. Hanson,et al.  Best practices in second stage labor care: maternal bearing down and positioning. , 2007, Journal of midwifery & women's health.

[18]  A. de Jonge,et al.  Birthing positions. A qualitative study into the views of women about various birthing positions , 2004, Journal of psychosomatic obstetrics and gynaecology.

[19]  C. Kettle Perineal Care , 1931, Clinical evidence.