Maternal and Fetal Outcome of Lamaze-Prepared Patients
To determine whether Lamaze childbirth preparation is harmless, harmful, or beneficial, 500 consecutive Lamaze-prepared patients were compared to 500 hand-picked controls, matched for age, race, parity, and educational level. Lamaze preparation was found to have a significant beneficial effect in al...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953) 1978-06, Vol.51 (6), p.643-647 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 647 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 6 |
| container_start_page | 643 |
| container_title | Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953) |
| container_volume | 51 |
| creator | HUGHEY, MICHAEL J. McELIN, THOMAS W. YOUNG, TODD |
| description | To determine whether Lamaze childbirth preparation is harmless, harmful, or beneficial, 500 consecutive Lamaze-prepared patients were compared to 500 hand-picked controls, matched for age, race, parity, and educational level. Lamaze preparation was found to have a significant beneficial effect in almost every obstetric preformance category. The Lamaze-oriented patients had one-fourth the number of cesarean sections and one-fifth the amount of fetal distress (P < .005). Postpartum infection, measured both by maternal febrile morbidity and by the incidence of antibiotic use, was one-third that of the controls (P < .005). Similarly, the 'prepared' patients had fewer perineal lacerations and those that occurred were not as serious as those in the control patients (P < .005). The control patients had three times as many cases of toxemia of pregnancy (P < .005) and twice as many of prematurity (P < .05). |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_74077612</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>74077612</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-p2501-af465219844f0765199aa4e34fac4528c3cb6e91b6b300ffd87108d45fcad7183</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotUMtOwzAQtBCvUvgDDjlxs-RXbOeIKkqRitoDSNyiTbJWC84DO1EFX49Re9rdmdFqZs7IjFsjqZDy45zMGBMFNVapa3IT4ydjjOtCXpFLrYVQbEb0K4wYOvAZdE22xDFtm2ms-xaz3mVraOEX6TbgAAGbbAvjHrsx3pILBz7i3WnOyfvy6W2xouvN88vicU0HkTNOwSmdC14kA44ZnfOiAFAolYNa5cLWsq40FrzSlWTMucYazmyjcldDY7iVc_Jw_DuE_nvCOJbtPtboPXTYT7E0ihmjuUjC-5NwqlpsyiHsWwg_5TFnotWRPvQ-5Y1ffjpgKHcIftyVqRamk2HKC2OZThf9h7j8A7-9XXM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>74077612</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Maternal and Fetal Outcome of Lamaze-Prepared Patients</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>HUGHEY, MICHAEL J. ; McELIN, THOMAS W. ; YOUNG, TODD</creator><creatorcontrib>HUGHEY, MICHAEL J. ; McELIN, THOMAS W. ; YOUNG, TODD</creatorcontrib><description>To determine whether Lamaze childbirth preparation is harmless, harmful, or beneficial, 500 consecutive Lamaze-prepared patients were compared to 500 hand-picked controls, matched for age, race, parity, and educational level. Lamaze preparation was found to have a significant beneficial effect in almost every obstetric preformance category. The Lamaze-oriented patients had one-fourth the number of cesarean sections and one-fifth the amount of fetal distress (P < .005). Postpartum infection, measured both by maternal febrile morbidity and by the incidence of antibiotic use, was one-third that of the controls (P < .005). Similarly, the 'prepared' patients had fewer perineal lacerations and those that occurred were not as serious as those in the control patients (P < .005). The control patients had three times as many cases of toxemia of pregnancy (P < .005) and twice as many of prematurity (P < .05).</description><identifier>ISSN: 0029-7844</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-233X</identifier><identifier>PMID: 662240</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists</publisher><subject>Adult ; Analgesia - utilization ; Anesthesia, Obstetrical - utilization ; Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use ; Cesarean Section ; Delivery, Obstetric ; Female ; Fetal Distress - epidemiology ; Fever - epidemiology ; Humans ; Infant, Newborn ; Labor, Obstetric ; Natural Childbirth - methods ; Obstetric Labor Complications - epidemiology ; Perineum - injuries ; Placenta Diseases - epidemiology ; Pre-Eclampsia - epidemiology ; Pregnancy ; Pregnancy, Prolonged ; Puerperal Infection - drug therapy ; Puerperal Infection - epidemiology ; Time Factors</subject><ispartof>Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953), 1978-06, Vol.51 (6), p.643-647</ispartof><rights>1978 The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/662240$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>HUGHEY, MICHAEL J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McELIN, THOMAS W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>YOUNG, TODD</creatorcontrib><title>Maternal and Fetal Outcome of Lamaze-Prepared Patients</title><title>Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953)</title><addtitle>Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><description>To determine whether Lamaze childbirth preparation is harmless, harmful, or beneficial, 500 consecutive Lamaze-prepared patients were compared to 500 hand-picked controls, matched for age, race, parity, and educational level. Lamaze preparation was found to have a significant beneficial effect in almost every obstetric preformance category. The Lamaze-oriented patients had one-fourth the number of cesarean sections and one-fifth the amount of fetal distress (P < .005). Postpartum infection, measured both by maternal febrile morbidity and by the incidence of antibiotic use, was one-third that of the controls (P < .005). Similarly, the 'prepared' patients had fewer perineal lacerations and those that occurred were not as serious as those in the control patients (P < .005). The control patients had three times as many cases of toxemia of pregnancy (P < .005) and twice as many of prematurity (P < .05).</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Analgesia - utilization</subject><subject>Anesthesia, Obstetrical - utilization</subject><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Cesarean Section</subject><subject>Delivery, Obstetric</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fetal Distress - epidemiology</subject><subject>Fever - epidemiology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infant, Newborn</subject><subject>Labor, Obstetric</subject><subject>Natural Childbirth - methods</subject><subject>Obstetric Labor Complications - epidemiology</subject><subject>Perineum - injuries</subject><subject>Placenta Diseases - epidemiology</subject><subject>Pre-Eclampsia - epidemiology</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Pregnancy, Prolonged</subject><subject>Puerperal Infection - drug therapy</subject><subject>Puerperal Infection - epidemiology</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><issn>0029-7844</issn><issn>1873-233X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1978</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNotUMtOwzAQtBCvUvgDDjlxs-RXbOeIKkqRitoDSNyiTbJWC84DO1EFX49Re9rdmdFqZs7IjFsjqZDy45zMGBMFNVapa3IT4ydjjOtCXpFLrYVQbEb0K4wYOvAZdE22xDFtm2ms-xaz3mVraOEX6TbgAAGbbAvjHrsx3pILBz7i3WnOyfvy6W2xouvN88vicU0HkTNOwSmdC14kA44ZnfOiAFAolYNa5cLWsq40FrzSlWTMucYazmyjcldDY7iVc_Jw_DuE_nvCOJbtPtboPXTYT7E0ihmjuUjC-5NwqlpsyiHsWwg_5TFnotWRPvQ-5Y1ffjpgKHcIftyVqRamk2HKC2OZThf9h7j8A7-9XXM</recordid><startdate>197806</startdate><enddate>197806</enddate><creator>HUGHEY, MICHAEL J.</creator><creator>McELIN, THOMAS W.</creator><creator>YOUNG, TODD</creator><general>The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>197806</creationdate><title>Maternal and Fetal Outcome of Lamaze-Prepared Patients</title><author>HUGHEY, MICHAEL J. ; McELIN, THOMAS W. ; YOUNG, TODD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p2501-af465219844f0765199aa4e34fac4528c3cb6e91b6b300ffd87108d45fcad7183</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1978</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Analgesia - utilization</topic><topic>Anesthesia, Obstetrical - utilization</topic><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Cesarean Section</topic><topic>Delivery, Obstetric</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fetal Distress - epidemiology</topic><topic>Fever - epidemiology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infant, Newborn</topic><topic>Labor, Obstetric</topic><topic>Natural Childbirth - methods</topic><topic>Obstetric Labor Complications - epidemiology</topic><topic>Perineum - injuries</topic><topic>Placenta Diseases - epidemiology</topic><topic>Pre-Eclampsia - epidemiology</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Pregnancy, Prolonged</topic><topic>Puerperal Infection - drug therapy</topic><topic>Puerperal Infection - epidemiology</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>HUGHEY, MICHAEL J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McELIN, THOMAS W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>YOUNG, TODD</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>HUGHEY, MICHAEL J.</au><au>McELIN, THOMAS W.</au><au>YOUNG, TODD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Maternal and Fetal Outcome of Lamaze-Prepared Patients</atitle><jtitle>Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953)</jtitle><addtitle>Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><date>1978-06</date><risdate>1978</risdate><volume>51</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>643</spage><epage>647</epage><pages>643-647</pages><issn>0029-7844</issn><eissn>1873-233X</eissn><abstract>To determine whether Lamaze childbirth preparation is harmless, harmful, or beneficial, 500 consecutive Lamaze-prepared patients were compared to 500 hand-picked controls, matched for age, race, parity, and educational level. Lamaze preparation was found to have a significant beneficial effect in almost every obstetric preformance category. The Lamaze-oriented patients had one-fourth the number of cesarean sections and one-fifth the amount of fetal distress (P < .005). Postpartum infection, measured both by maternal febrile morbidity and by the incidence of antibiotic use, was one-third that of the controls (P < .005). Similarly, the 'prepared' patients had fewer perineal lacerations and those that occurred were not as serious as those in the control patients (P < .005). The control patients had three times as many cases of toxemia of pregnancy (P < .005) and twice as many of prematurity (P < .05).</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists</pub><pmid>662240</pmid><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0029-7844 |
| ispartof | Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953), 1978-06, Vol.51 (6), p.643-647 |
| issn | 0029-7844 1873-233X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_74077612 |
| source | MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete |
| subjects | Adult Analgesia - utilization Anesthesia, Obstetrical - utilization Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use Cesarean Section Delivery, Obstetric Female Fetal Distress - epidemiology Fever - epidemiology Humans Infant, Newborn Labor, Obstetric Natural Childbirth - methods Obstetric Labor Complications - epidemiology Perineum - injuries Placenta Diseases - epidemiology Pre-Eclampsia - epidemiology Pregnancy Pregnancy, Prolonged Puerperal Infection - drug therapy Puerperal Infection - epidemiology Time Factors |
| title | Maternal and Fetal Outcome of Lamaze-Prepared Patients |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-03T12%3A26%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Maternal%20and%20Fetal%20Outcome%20of%20Lamaze-Prepared%20Patients&rft.jtitle=Obstetrics%20and%20gynecology%20(New%20York.%201953)&rft.au=HUGHEY,%20MICHAEL%20J.&rft.date=1978-06&rft.volume=51&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=643&rft.epage=647&rft.pages=643-647&rft.issn=0029-7844&rft.eissn=1873-233X&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E74077612%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=74077612&rft_id=info:pmid/662240&rfr_iscdi=true |