论文部分内容阅读
目的:对比水中分娩及镇痛仪干预分娩同硬膜外麻醉镇痛分娩的效果及对产程的影响。方法:取221例产妇,其中83例硬膜外阻滞麻醉镇痛产妇为对照组,同期70例水中分娩产妇、68例使用镇痛仪产妇为观察组,观察3组产妇的镇痛效果、产程时间、产后出血及新生儿情况。结果:水中分娩组和麻醉组镇痛效果相当,仪器组镇痛效果总体差于水中分娩组及麻醉组。水中分娩组活跃期时间及第二产程时间显著少于其他两组,3组产后出血及新生儿情况差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:水中分娩镇痛效果好,明显缩短产程,未增加产后出血及新生儿窒息风险,是无禁忌证产妇的首选;椎管内麻醉镇痛效果确切,对操作人员及监护设施要求较高,其推广有赖于产妇的接受程度及麻醉监护的水平;镇痛仪操作方便,产妇接受程度高,镇痛效果可,可作为基层推广的首选。
Objective: To compare the effects of childbirth and analgesia in intervening childbirth with epidural anesthesia and delivery. Methods: Totally 221 maternal women were enrolled, of whom 83 were epidural analgesia and analgesic for the control group. Seventy women in the same period delivered water and 68 women used analgesia as the observation group. The analgesic effects of the three groups were observed, Labor time, postpartum hemorrhage and neonatal conditions. Results: Analgesia was similar in water delivery group and anesthesia group. The analgesic effect of instrument group was worse than that of water delivery group and anesthesia group. The time of active stage and the second stage of labor in childbirth group were significantly less than those in the other two groups. The postpartum hemorrhage and newborns in group 3 had no significant difference (P> 0.05). Conclusion: The analgesic effect of labor in water is good, and the labor process is obviously shortened, the risk of postpartum hemorrhage and neonatal asphyxia is not increased, which is the first choice for women without contraindications. The analgesic effect of spinal anesthesia is exact, which requires more operators and monitoring facilities, Its promotion depends on the degree of maternal acceptance and the level of anesthesia guardianship; analgesic instrument easy to operate, high maternal acceptance, analgesic effect can be used as the promotion of grass-roots choice.