Thursday, April 30, 2009
Sadrivaan A and B (The Hilton Istanbul Hotel )
Purpose: This study aimed to explore video-based Lamaze method on controlling for labor pain compared to traditional nursing guideline.
Methods: The subjects were primiparas and labor with 32 weeks or more gestations. The study period was between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2004. The study took quasi-experimental design, and divided subjects to four study groups, including two experimental groups (E1: traditional nursing guideline plus video-based Lamaze method,23 primiparas, and E2: video-based Lamaze method,17 primiparas,) and two control groups (C1: traditional nursing guideline,25 primiparas, and C2: none of any nursing guideline received,19 primiparas). Pain was evaluated by Short form McGill pain questionnaire (MPO-SF).
Results: From the evaluation of labor pain, overall mean value of labor pain was 19.31±8.02. The E1 groups (12.57±4.15) and E2 groups(14.77±3.47) both had better performances than C1 group (22.80±8.30) and C2 group (26.93±4.49)Galso had statistically significant (F=28.96, p<.001). From the univariate analysis, the significant variables associated with labor pain were age (F=6.82, p<.001)Aeducation (F=8.06, p=.001) and if take or not of Lamaze method classes (t=2.84, p=.006). From the multiple regression model, there were found the statistically association with labor pain just including groups after adjusting for confounding factors.
Conclusion: In conclusion, the present study revealed that, compared with traditional nursing guideline, video-based Lamaze method could control labor pain more effectively and reduce painless labor used.
Methods: The subjects were primiparas and labor with 32 weeks or more gestations. The study period was between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2004. The study took quasi-experimental design, and divided subjects to four study groups, including two experimental groups (E1: traditional nursing guideline plus video-based Lamaze method,23 primiparas, and E2: video-based Lamaze method,17 primiparas,) and two control groups (C1: traditional nursing guideline,25 primiparas, and C2: none of any nursing guideline received,19 primiparas). Pain was evaluated by Short form McGill pain questionnaire (MPO-SF).
Results: From the evaluation of labor pain, overall mean value of labor pain was 19.31±8.02. The E1 groups (12.57±4.15) and E2 groups(14.77±3.47) both had better performances than C1 group (22.80±8.30) and C2 group (26.93±4.49)Galso had statistically significant (F=28.96, p<.001). From the univariate analysis, the significant variables associated with labor pain were age (F=6.82, p<.001)Aeducation (F=8.06, p=.001) and if take or not of Lamaze method classes (t=2.84, p=.006). From the multiple regression model, there were found the statistically association with labor pain just including groups after adjusting for confounding factors.
Conclusion: In conclusion, the present study revealed that, compared with traditional nursing guideline, video-based Lamaze method could control labor pain more effectively and reduce painless labor used.
Learning Objectives: This study aimed to explore video-based Lamaze method on controlling for labor pain compared to traditional nursing guideline.
Sub-Theme: Child labour: Economic and health effects
See more of: Poster: Child Labour: Economic and Health Effects
See more of: Public Health Practices Around the Globe
See more of: Public Health Practices Around the Globe
Previous Abstract
|
Next Abstract >>