2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.annfar.2006.03.024
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Postures maternelles pendant le travail : description et interférence avec l'analgésie péridurale

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
3
3

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Study examining lying on side versus lying on back Cohen 2002 No outcomes relevant to the review reported. COMET 2001 The trial compared low-dose combined spinal epidural and low-dose infusion techniques and traditional epidural techniques Danilenko-Dixon 1996 The purpose of this study was to compare cardiac output after epidural analgesia in both positions Diaz 1980 This study use quasi-randomised group allocation, but more than a third of the experimental group were excluded from the analysis; women that did not comply with the protocol were excluded post randomisation Divon 1985 No data relevant to the review were reported. Outcomes - BP, uterine work and beat to beat variability Ducloy-Bouthors 2006 Outcomes relevant to the review not reported Hemminki 1983 In this study the comparison was between two management policies rather than two different treatments.One group was nursed in bed and one group was encouraged to mobilise but there were also other differences in the treatment the two groups received which may have had an effect on outcomes. Women nursed in bed had routine amniotomy, women in the ambulant group did not; monitoring was also different in the two groups.…”
Section: Characteristics Of Included Studies [Ordered By Study Id]mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Study examining lying on side versus lying on back Cohen 2002 No outcomes relevant to the review reported. COMET 2001 The trial compared low-dose combined spinal epidural and low-dose infusion techniques and traditional epidural techniques Danilenko-Dixon 1996 The purpose of this study was to compare cardiac output after epidural analgesia in both positions Diaz 1980 This study use quasi-randomised group allocation, but more than a third of the experimental group were excluded from the analysis; women that did not comply with the protocol were excluded post randomisation Divon 1985 No data relevant to the review were reported. Outcomes - BP, uterine work and beat to beat variability Ducloy-Bouthors 2006 Outcomes relevant to the review not reported Hemminki 1983 In this study the comparison was between two management policies rather than two different treatments.One group was nursed in bed and one group was encouraged to mobilise but there were also other differences in the treatment the two groups received which may have had an effect on outcomes. Women nursed in bed had routine amniotomy, women in the ambulant group did not; monitoring was also different in the two groups.…”
Section: Characteristics Of Included Studies [Ordered By Study Id]mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A relative disadvantage of this technique is the organisation of equipment for the mother (infusion, epidural, electronic blood pressure) and fetus (heart monitoring). Regarding the possible effect of the hands and knees’ position on the epidural anaesthesia, a French study conducted by anaesthetists showed that hyperflexion at the hips did not influence the expected epidural analgesia levels [23]. …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%